Johannes Berg napsal(a):
> On Sun, 2007-08-12 at 15:08 +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> 
>> +    if (control->flags & IEEE80211_TXCTL_REQ_TX_STATUS)
>> +            pkt_data->flags |= IEEE80211_TXPD_REQ_TX_STATUS;
>> +    if (control->flags & IEEE80211_TXCTL_DO_NOT_ENCRYPT)
>> +            pkt_data->flags |= IEEE80211_TXPD_DO_NOT_ENCRYPT;
>> +    if (control->flags & IEEE80211_TXCTL_REQUEUE)
>> +            pkt_data->flags |= IEEE80211_TXPD_REQUEUE;
>> +    if (control->type == IEEE80211_IF_TYPE_MGMT)
>> +            pkt_data->flags |= IEEE80211_TXPD_MGMT_IFACE;
> 
> This looks weird. Can't we just use the same flags?

I don't think, that it must be subset one of each another in the future. (This
is why I created yet another bits defined).

Do we still want the same flags?

-- 
Jiri Slaby ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Faculty of Informatics, Masaryk University
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to