On Mon, 2016-06-13 at 21:25 +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote:
>
> On 10-06-16 23:08, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-06-10 at 12:47 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
> > > I see this was added sometime recently: NL80211_ATTR_PAD
> > >
> > > If another enum member is added, should it replace the PAD en
On 10-06-16 23:08, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-06-10 at 12:47 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
>> I see this was added sometime recently: NL80211_ATTR_PAD
>>
>> If another enum member is added, should it replace the PAD enum?
>
> No.
>
>> At the least, I think we need some comments about how t
On 06/10/2016 02:08 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2016-06-10 at 12:47 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
I see this was added sometime recently: NL80211_ATTR_PAD
If another enum member is added, should it replace the PAD enum?
No.
At the least, I think we need some comments about how this is to
On Fri, 2016-06-10 at 12:47 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
> I see this was added sometime recently: NL80211_ATTR_PAD
>
> If another enum member is added, should it replace the PAD enum?
No.
> At the least, I think we need some comments about how this is to be
> dealt with.
>
You simply ignore it :
On 10-06-16 21:47, Ben Greear wrote:
> I see this was added sometime recently: NL80211_ATTR_PAD
>
> If another enum member is added, should it replace the PAD enum?
Nope. This attribute is used as padattr by 64-bit aligned netlink
functions, ie. nla_put_u64_64bit().
> At the least, I think we
I see this was added sometime recently: NL80211_ATTR_PAD
If another enum member is added, should it replace the PAD enum?
At the least, I think we need some comments about how this is to be dealt
with.
Thanks,
Ben
--
Ben Greear
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
--
To unsu