From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Mar 31 14:04:17 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 078C8106566C;
	Wed, 31 Mar 2010 14:04:17 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bschmidt@mx.techwires.net)
Received: from mx.techwires.net (mx.techwires.net [IPv6:2001:4d88:100f:1::3])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CCDE8FC08;
	Wed, 31 Mar 2010 14:04:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mx.techwires.net (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 51CE123DC4; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:04:15 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:04:15 +0200
From: Bernhard Schmidt <bschmidt@techwires.net>
To: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20100331140415.GB68231@mx.techwires.net>
References: <D1EDB040-BB1F-41E2-8E1B-9DEF6171903D@gmail.com>
	<p2xf19c444a1003310624r68579888jdddb0237d8da4b3f@mail.gmail.com>
	<63B143BF-20C9-425F-8969-B7452191E84F@freebsd.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <63B143BF-20C9-425F-8969-B7452191E84F@freebsd.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: freebsd-net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, Antoine Brodin <antoine@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: net80211 ratectl proof of concept
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 14:04:17 -0000

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 02:31:30PM +0100, Rui Paulo wrote:
> On 31 Mar 2010, at 14:24, Antoine Brodin wrote:
> > This looks great!
> > Is there specific reasons to use pointers and not ints for some
> > arguments of foo_tx_complete() and foo_tx_update()?
> 
> Not really. I'll probably switch them to ints at some point.

Hmm, I somehow like the idea of not passing integers here. Looking at
ath_rate/sample it passes a struct. I don't know whether this can be
rewritten though.

-- 
Bernhard