In D35752#813636, @bz wrote:

@lwhsu do you want me to push this to main or do you want to?

@lwhsu do you want me to push this to main or do you want to?

In D35751#811179, @adrian wrote:

oh! hm!

I wonder if this is how it used to be in the deep, distant past. ok, this is right!

I wonder if this is how it used to be in the deep, distant past. ok, this is right!

In D35751#811027, @adrian wrote:

why? it's designed to be used as an emulator / virtual 802.11 interface for building tests. :-) So it should be wlanX.

why? it's designed to be used as an emulator / virtual 802.11 interface for building tests. :-) So it should be wlanX.

Please separate the format change and functional change. You can create two differentials and mention one is depending on the other.

In D35624#808065, @lwhsu wrote:

Probably the commit message can be more precise. For example:

Remove store only variable and unnecessary bzero()

- Remove the variable set but not used to fix build on -CURRENT
- Remove bzero() on the space malloc'd with M_ZERO flag.

@rickywu0421_gmail.com: is this message correct?

Probably the commit message can be more precise. For example:

I have the stupid question (without looking):

Here's the updated diff.

Sounds good, will post a patch shortly.

.. next to the existing node one

Let's make it more generic - and I thought it was - oh yeah! Look at ieee80211_get_node_txpower().

Keep in mind that should this patch get approved, someone other than me will need to commit this.