On Tue, 2021-08-10 at 19:48 -0700, Muna Sinada wrote: > Hello Johannes, > > I saw on your review comment that this wrapper is not needed. I wanted > to confirm with you if it would be ok to call a cfg80211 API from a > mac80211 based driver, since that is what would be done if this > wrapper is removed. Yes, that's fine. > Additionally, another reason I have this wrapper is so I can place a > tracepoint. What are your thoughts about this? You already have a tracepoint on cfg80211, seems sufficient? johannes
