On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 09:12:56AM +0100, Carl Nordbeck wrote: > > From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@xxxxxxxxx] > > On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 11:48:19PM +0100, Carl Nordbeck wrote: > > > Hi Greg. > > > The reason for this is that the name usbX is very confusing for a > > > MobileBroadband device. > > > This type of devices needs a control-plane to start working, ie AT > > > command channel to initiate the data user-plane. > > > The nameing mbX reflects the will from several parties(GSM > > > Association, > > > Ericsson...) to use MobileBroadband. > > > MBN is short for MobileBroadbandNetworkdevice, > > > > Do any other types of Linux network devices currently use > > this name? Do any userspace tools expect this naming scheme > > and handle it differently than other network devices already? > > Is this all docmented somewhere? > > > > There is no other devices using this name yet. Here is a link to > GSMA with full list of companies supporting MobileBroadband: > http://www.gsmworld.com/our-work/programmes-and-initiatives/mobile-broad > band/mobile_broadband-industry.htm > > We currently needs some kind of flag to userspace applications, > i.e NetworkMananger or Conman, to indicate that the device do need a > seperate control-plane to operate. Yes, that would help out, and sounds necessary. It also means that creating a new network device name "type" would not be needed at all, right? > It can be possible to make a totaly seperate module that do not reuse > usbnet? Why would you want to do this? Just for a new flag you wish to export? Just add it to the existing module. What do the network driver developers think about the new device name? Is there a reason you have not Cc:ed them on this patch and brought this name change to their attention? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
