On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 11:06:29PM +0100, Benoit PAPILLAULT wrote:
>> Can you tell what the functional difference is between the old code and new
>> code? E.g. a padding that would be incorrectly computed from before?
>>
>>
> Correct. On some frames padding is incorrect. This patch is more for
Bob Copeland a écrit :
> On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Benoit Papillault
> wrote:
>
>> Instead of computing the padding size based on the IEEE 802.11 header length,
>> we directly compute the padding position first and then the padding size
>> next.
>> We have changed some functions to pass
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Benoit Papillault
wrote:
> Instead of computing the padding size based on the IEEE 802.11 header length,
> we directly compute the padding position first and then the padding size next.
> We have changed some functions to pass them the padding size directly. It has
