[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47B61473.7060206@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 23:38:43 +0100
From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...il.com>
CC: linville@...driver.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, ath5k-devel@...ts.ath5k.org,
Nick Kossifidis <mickflemm@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] WDEV, ath5k, don't return int from bool function
On 02/15/2008 11:08 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 3:58 PM, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> -static bool
>> +static int
>> ath5k_hw_setup_xr_tx_desc(struct ath5k_hw *ah, struct ath5k_desc *desc,
>> unsigned int tx_rate1, u_int tx_tries1, u_int tx_rate2, u_int tx_tries2,
>> unsigned int tx_rate3, u_int tx_tries3)
>> @@ -3773,10 +3773,10 @@ ath5k_hw_setup_xr_tx_desc(struct ath5k_hw *ah, struct ath5k_desc *desc,
>>
>> #undef _XTX_TRIES
>>
>> - return true;
>> + return 1;
>> }
>>
>> - return false;
>> + return 0;
>> }
>
> Shouldn't we then treat 0 as OK?
Sorry, I don't understand you. There is return -EINVAL in the function above
this too and we need to cope with another two states but the error: it is
supported/it isn't. You mean to consider 0 as supported, -ENODEV/-EOPNOTSUPP as
unsupported and the rest as error?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists