On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 09:38:28PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
>
> > Its just a random number we use as a receipt. I was thinking of
> > having it to provide uniqueness on requests and to provide a cookie
> > to ensure it comes from the kernel but now that I think about this
> > a bit more its really unnecessary.
>
> > If we keep UUID we can remove the alpha2, you're right. But it seems
> > we may rather keep the alpha2 and just nuke the UUID.
>
> ok, makes sense to me, yes.
Alright, death to UUID then.
> > > > + reg_rule_policy[NL80211_REG_RULE_ATTR_MAX + 1] = {
> > > > + [NL80211_ATTR_REG_RULE_FLAGS] = { .type = NLA_U32 },
> > >
> > > I thought we agreed to use actual NLA flags for the flags, in a nested
> > > attribute, instead of using bitmaps.
> >
> > I forgot if we did. If we keep them as they are we can actually end
> > up using them to replace the channel flags themselves with these
> > though. What do you think? Also if we do use a nested attribut for
> > the flags what would be the benefit?
>
> Mostly we wouldn't need to care about any space concerns like adding a
> "FLAGS2" attribute if we run out of the 32 bits we have there. I don't
> feel strongly, but it seems to me that using NLA flags is more natural
> in netlink and makes the separation clearer. Maybe.
I'll give it a shot then, but I'll leave it for last. So we'll end
up with two separate flags if we do this then -- one for the
channels for the wiphy and one for the channels as per regulatory.
Hm.
> > > > +/**
> > > > + * regulatory_hint - hint to wireless core a regulatory domain
> > > > + * @alpha2: the ISO-3166 alpha2 the driver thinks we're on
> > > > + * @wiphy: the driver's very own &struct wiphy
> > > > + *
> > > > + * Wireles drivers can use this function to hint to the wireles core
> > >
> > > type in both instances :)
> >
> > Hm? I don't get it.
>
> Sorry, made a typo myself. typ_o_, not typ_e_. you wrote "wireles".
Danke.
> > > > +static int is_an_alpha2(char *alpha2)
> > > > +{
> > > > + if (is_alpha_upper(alpha2[0]) && is_alpha_upper(alpha2[1]))
> > > > + return 1;
> > > > + return 0;
> > >
> > > Why's that so important?
> >
> > Its not, but we should want to pick one or the other to use. I
> > picked alpha_upper. Have some other ideas?
>
> I'm just wondering whether we care at all. If userspace wants to call it
> "de" when we requested "DE", what do we care? OTOH, since we match this
> against 11d info I guess we do have to pick one or the other.
I do have to check whether the spec says "use upper" or not, I don't
recall. I just figured -- since we are calling userspace then well
we should expect userspace to give us the same chars back.
Luis
--
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
