Message-ID: <50F93821.1030905@cozybit.com> (sfid-20130118_125522_355995_EF5FF1FF)
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:55:13 +0100
From: Marco Porsch <marco@cozybit.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
CC: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, devel@lists.open80211s.org,
	Ivan Bezyazychnyy <ivan.bezyazychnyy@gmail.com>,
	Mike Krinkin <krinkin.m.u@gmail.com>,
	Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 6/6] mac80211: mesh power save basics
References: <1357571093-12868-1-git-send-email-marco@cozybit.com>   <1357571093-12868-7-git-send-email-marco@cozybit.com>   (sfid-20130107_160510_532684_9863E9B0) <1358374485.15012.20.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net>  <50F82808.6040206@cozybit.com> (sfid-20130117_173422_125602_E9681D63) <1358509959.5035.0.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net>
In-Reply-To: <1358509959.5035.0.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On 01/18/2013 12:52 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 17:34 +0100, Marco Porsch wrote:
>> On 01/16/2013 11:14 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2013-01-07 at 16:04 +0100, Marco Porsch wrote:
>>>
>>>> mode determines when non-peer mesh STA may send Probe Requests and Mesh Peering
>>>
>>> Please break lines to less than 72 characters, I personally prefer
>>> around 60 or so but I'll apply 72 too.
>>>
>>>> +static inline bool ieee80211_has_qos_mesh_ps(__le16 qc)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	return (qc & cpu_to_le16(IEEE80211_QOS_CTL_MESH_PS_LEVEL)) != 0;
>>>
>>> bool means you don't need the !=0 and parentheses.
>>
>> Actually, then it pops the following warning:
>>     CHECK   net/mac80211/mesh_ps.c
>> include/linux/ieee80211.h:584:19: warning: incorrect type in return
>> expression (different base types)
>> include/linux/ieee80211.h:584:19:    expected bool
>> include/linux/ieee80211.h:584:19:    got restricted __le16
>>
>>
>> Other functions in that file have following style:
>> static inline int ieee80211_has_pm(__le16 fc)
>> {
>> 	return (fc & cpu_to_le16(IEEE80211_FCTL_PM)) != 0;
>> }
>>
>> What do you recommend?
>
> I'm clearly not quick enough for you, sorry. I guess we should keep it
> as is then, but I see you removed it entirely later? Anyway ... I just
> wasn't aware sparse would then complain, that's a bit stupid but hey.

Ah sorry. I just realized that
1) all the inlines in that file are about Frame Control and none copes 
with QoS Control
2) I am the only one using QoS Mesh PM and in just a single occasion

So... SNIP =)

--Marco