On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 07:29:30PM -0800, Ben Greear wrote: > This patch below was added to the kernel around 2/24/2015 > > I am curious mostly about the first change: I thought the transmitter-addr > relates to the radio device, not the vdev (sta, ap, etc). > > But, wouldn't using data from the header break that assumption? I'm not sure this assumption is correct. I have a hard time seeing the value in basing the transmitter addr attribute on some hardware address that may not even be used. > Is there any actual advantage to having more than one address per > hwsim radio? It seems it complicates things for no particular > reason as far as I can tell? As a practical matter: the radios already have two "hardware" addresses, and as reported in the commit log, only one of them worked with the netlink interface, and it wasn't even the default address. I suppose there's no real benefit to multi-vif on hwsim vs multiple phys, other than testing multi-vif support in the stack, but why not? I think this patch actually simplifies things. Does this patch cause problems for your userspace implementation? -- Bob Copeland %% http://bobcopeland.com/ -- 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
