On Fri, 2016-07-08 at 10:22 -0500, Denis Kenzior wrote: > > Apologies, I've only been looking at the kernel side for several > days, so my understanding is still incomplete. > > I was looking at mac80211/iface.c: ieee80211_if_add() which seems to > handle NL80211_IFTYPE_P2P_DEVICE specially by not > creating/registering a > net_device object. For some reason I thought that this object was > registered somewhere later, but my understanding was incorrect. So > the entire 'side effect' paragraph above does not apply. Ok, makes sense. > Are you okay with the general approach? I see no issues with sending these events out. I'd like them to actually be reliable (if present) though, not double as you'd implied - but I didn't really understand in which cases you were expecting issues, was it only P2P-Device? > Are there any locking issues I > might be overlooking? Not that I'm aware of. All of the netdev/wdev handling should be protected by RTNL. johannes -- 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
