On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 16:55 -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > A few comments below -- many of them are nits or somewhat minor. > I think the ieee80211_rate.h one needs to be resolved for sure. Also, > splitting iwl-base.c is definitely worth considering -- building two > object from one source is a bit ugly. > > Please respond to the questions/comments, and indicate if/when you > will split iwl-base.c. Will split it in the next version as well as addressing all your comments below. > Also, let's figure-out what really needs to > be exportd to drivers from ieee80211_rate.h and get that done. Since they are device specific rate scale algorithm, I don't think they will help to increase performance for other devices. So make them stay together with the driver is a better choice (vs. with mac80211). If so, the rate scale interface has to be abstracted from internal mac80211. The current dependencies are as below: iwl3945-rs -> rate_control_ops (ieee80211_rate.h) rate_control_ops -> sta_info (sta_info.h) rate_control_ops -> ieee80211_local (ieee80211_i.h) ieee80211_local -> ieee80211_key (ieee80211_key.h) If we want to avoid a big restructure of the mac80211 headers, the easiest way is to move four header files from net/mac80211 to include/net/ and rename them with mac80211_ prefix (especially for sta_info.h). This way, for any mac80211 based wireless drivers want to create their own rate scale algorithm, they can smiply include <net/mac80211_rate.h> and implement all the callback functions. Comments? If you all agree with this change, especially the mac80211 folks, I'll come up with a patch for it. Thanks, -yi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
