called in an endless loop...) or the new code (which is fine either
I'm not sure its fine though? By my reading it enters into the loop at least
once, so you're sending a bogus IE anyway (with 0xff or something). But anyhow,
this is academic.
> You're giving a no_cck hint, not control over the rates,
right? So the rates
> should still come from wiphy_get_supported_rates().
To be specific I think the final set should be a result of multiple
calls to wiphy_get_supported_rates and the no_cck_rates setting.
Why multiple? You're just operating on one band, no?
> If you want to stuff these
> into the uintset or just carry the no_cck hint into the IE builders is a
> different question. I would think the latter would be easier.
Not sure about that, but I didn't mean to refactor this code, only fix
a few one-liners. The refactoring if needed can happen in an
independent commit without functionality changes.
Okay, then lets just fix the NULL set issue and move on without touching the loops.