On 07/01/2014 07:29 PM, Ben Chan wrote: > > [Ben] AFAIK, there is another Intel i2400m WiMAX driver in kernel. The > wimax-tools probably works with that particular driver. I haven't > looked at either the i2400m driver or wimax-tools, and need to spend > some time to figure out the differences between them and the GCT ones. > However, the i2400m driver and wimax-tools don't seem to be under > active development either, so I'm not sure how generic or > representative they are. > That's true. The wimaxtools have not been updated for some time, I suspect that a major reason behind this is that there have not been other devices in the mainline. Nevertheless, using them is not required, as one can communicate with the driver directly through netlink. > I'm happy to help move the GCT driver forward to conform with common > interfaces and practices, but at the same time, would like to be > pragmatic about the approach we take. > I understand and agree. Fortunately, things seem to be not that grim: The wimax.h interface specifies communication through "message pipes", a means of free-form communication between user-space and the driver. So my understanding is that the library only needs to replace the lowest layer (ie ioctl/netlink) with the specified protocol over generic netlink. The interface of the immediately upper layer should be completely unaffected. On the driver side, there is probably a bit more work to be done if we are to support all operations (rfkill etc), but if it turns out to be too much we can always drop them, as supporting these operations is optional and it certainly does not affect your code. Anyway, this is only my current understanding. I'll have a more detailed look at all this and get back to you soon. Michalis _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
