On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 15:18 -0800, Christopher Wiley wrote: > > Agreed that for any non-trivial amount of logic, sharing it among as > many interfaces as possible becomes desirable. I'm less sure how > much generation should be going on. Our internal prototypes of this > interface (in Binder) generate the serialization boilerplate if > that's what you have in mind. Unfortunately, differences in type > systems and semantics between DBus and Binder make a common interface > specification kind of its own project. Yeah, that may very well be true. I haven't thought it to the logical end I guess :) > On the other hand, it would be nice if, past the IPC interface, we > were able to share the operations against common supplicant > objects. I guess in my mind that means that DBus and Binder would > both notice a new request is available on their control FD, > deserialize it as appropriate, and then both call into some common > backend, sending back responses as appropriate. That might make a lot of sense, saving a lot of logic code everywhere. > Our tentative plan is to prototype this a little internally, then > send up some RFCs to get your thoughts. Unfortunately, I can't be at > the netdev conference, although it would be nice to travel. > Ok :) I see you've posted something now, hopefully I'll get some time to take a look. johannes _______________________________________________ Hostap mailing list Hostap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/hostap
