Hi, On 27 February 2017 at 14:27, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Additionally I tried to add a HWSIM_ATTR_WIPHY to report the wiphy >> index directly without users going through wiphy name to index >> mapping, but get_wiphy_idx() is internal to cfg80211. The index is >> exposed to userspace and is more useful than the name so I wonder if >> this function should be exported from cfg80211. > > Do you really need the address? As it turns out it can be read from /sys, but I do need it so I can know what to put in HWSIM_ATTR_ADDR_RECEIVER based on the destination addr in the frame or if I want to forward the frame to all radios. Or is there another way to know that? > > I'd actually prefer to *only* have the wiphy index, and I don't really > see a problem with moving the wiphy_idx from struct > cfg80211_registered_device to struct wiphy. Ok, I'll try that. get_wiphy_idx can stay in place, not sure if I should just drop it. By having *only* the wiphy index you don't mean dropping the radio names altogether? The don't seem useful but userspace may expect them. Best regards
