On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 08:24 +0200, Thomas Graf wrote:
I think its best to use your patch for now and see where this leads to.
Alright, should I repost with a proper [PATCH] subject or is it good to
take as-is? :)
johannes
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in
the
From: Johannes Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:58:28 +0200
On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 08:24 +0200, Thomas Graf wrote:
I think its best to use your patch for now and see where this leads to.
Alright, should I repost with a proper [PATCH] subject or is it good to
take as-is? :)
* Johannes Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-14 11:21
On Thu, 2006-09-14 at 10:14 +0200, Thomas Graf wrote:
Looks good, we have to watch the size of struct nla_policy though.
This bumps the size from 4 bytes to 16 bytes on 64bit architectures
which might become a problem since we always use
This patch adds an NLA_CUSTOM_CHECK type for netlink attributes
in order to be able to centrally define new attribute structures
instead of having to check these special types in each function
that uses such an attribute.
nl80211 will benefit from this because it needs an information
element
* Johannes Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-14 09:44
This patch adds an NLA_CUSTOM_CHECK type for netlink attributes
in order to be able to centrally define new attribute structures
instead of having to check these special types in each function
that uses such an attribute.
nl80211 will
On Thu, 2006-09-14 at 10:14 +0200, Thomas Graf wrote:
Looks good, we have to watch the size of struct nla_policy though.
This bumps the size from 4 bytes to 16 bytes on 64bit architectures
which might become a problem since we always use ATTR_MAX sized
arrays.
Yes, I'm aware of that, but I
