On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 04:32:34PM -0700, John W. Linville wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 04:24:53PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 03:15:36PM -0700, John W. Linville wrote: > > > This is also an excuse to create the long rumored lib80211 module... > > > > How about stuffing it in something like: > > > > include/linux/wlandevice.h > > > > Is there a benefit to having a module for it as this time? > > The escape_essid function is currently not inlined. Are you > arguing that it should be? Just an idea, yes, but that's just because it didn't seem that escape_essid() in itself was enough reason to create a shiny new module. > Otherwise it needs to live _somewhere_. > The cfg80211 module might make sense, except that the libertas, > ipw2100, and ipw2200 drivers don't use cfg80211 (at least for now). If we want a framework for FullMAC drivers I think cfg80211 can play that role just fine as I believe it was designed that way. We could potentialy just add non-wiphy helper routines in there for now as well if all we need is a home for them. What if we want to make use of some of these in other cfg80211 drivers or maybe mac80211? > Besides, you have to start _somewhere_. I have a feeling that this > happened in the first place because there was nowhere for drivers to > share bits of code like this (other than mac80211 or iee80211). Agreed, although I do like to think cfg80211 can play this role as well, unless we want to remain strict about requiring a wiphy for all its callers. > > Which reminds me, net/ieee80211/ should be ipw'ized now that the > > old softmac drivers are gone. > > > > mcgrof@tesla ~/wireless-testing/drivers/net/wireless (git::v2.6.27-rc6)$ grep -nHr "#include <net/ieee80211.h>" * > > airo.c:50:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > atmel.c:70:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > hostap/hostap_main.c:29:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > hostap/hostap_hw.c:49:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > ipw2100.h:42:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > ipw2200.h:51:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > libertas/types.h:10:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > libertas/main.c:17:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > libertas/dev.h:13:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > libertas/wext.c:11:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > libertas/cmd.c:7:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > orinoco.c:88:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > rndis_wlan.c:44:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > wl3501.h:5:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > zd1201.c:24:#include <net/ieee80211.h> > > > > Whatever these suckers are using can probably be slapped in there as > > well. But yea -- we just need to get it done huh. > > > > Thoughts? > > I figure there are probably other bits that can be shared, but most of > them probably require at least _some_ recoding. This is a no-brainer > and it "breaks the ice" for more follow-on work. Sure, my vote goes towards cfg80211 with helpers which are non wiphy specific. The reason being that these drivers *could* also potentially be ported to use cfg80211 eventually and in fact I think this should be encouraged to help cfg80211 move forward to support them and so eventually [if/once] we have a Linux 3.0 we can ditch Wireless Extensions completely. I think an lib80211 would provide for more excuses for people to stuff things in there and help them never cross the line into cfg80211. 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
