Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: wtap.h / struct ieee802_11n & ac presence_flags
From: Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:03:09 -0700
On Sep 24, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Simon Barber <simon.barber () meraki net> wrote: Is there any reason that the presence_flags in these structs are done as a single flags field, requiring separate #defines to define the individual flags, rather than individual single bit members of the struct?
(Presumably the single-bit members would all be at the beginning of the structure, so that they get packed into a single word.) The reason I went that way was to let all the bits be cleared with a single assignment. I suppose we could memset the entire union. (BTW, it's not as if the only ones are for 11n and 11ac; each PHY that has additional information to provide has a member of the union.) ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe
Current thread:
- wtap.h / struct ieee802_11n & ac presence_flags Simon Barber (Sep 24)
- Re: wtap.h / struct ieee802_11n & ac presence_flags Guy Harris (Sep 24)
- Re: wtap.h / struct ieee802_11n & ac presence_flags Simon Barber (Sep 24)
- Re: wtap.h / struct ieee802_11n & ac presence_flags Guy Harris (Sep 24)
- Re: wtap.h / struct ieee802_11n & ac presence_flags Simon Barber (Sep 24)
- Re: wtap.h / struct ieee802_11n & ac presence_flags Guy Harris (Sep 24)