On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 9:17 PM, Dan E <trg_info@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > What is the purpose of the "intersect" program in CRDA? It builds but it > doesn't seem to be used anywhere. We use it to check to see if we have to update the world regulatory domain. You run intersect against the regulatory.bin for example to get the intersection of all regulatory domains. > I also notice the CRDA source has its > own nl80211.h header file, as does the source tree for "iw". Shouldn't > userspace tools just include the sanitized kernel header from the > standard gcc include-file locations? Having multiple copies (and > versions) of nl80211.h everywhere seems like a bad idea. Yes and no. We keep the latest header in crda and iw so we can get it to compile to work with the latest stuff, even if you don't have support for the new stuff on your old kernel. So although iw and crda are built with support for the shiny new stuff the kernel netlink messages which apply to the new stuff simply won't work. This lets you have, for example, an iw and crda for 2.6.28 and still have it working in case you want to test drive wireless-testing (which as stuff for 2.6.29) or compat-wireless (which has wireless-testing stuff backported). > Will CRDA work with AP mode? That's where my primary interest lies (I'm > writing a new driver for an as-yet unsupported chipset). I can see the > usefulness of CRDA in a laptop. I have a much harder time seeing the > benefit of a 250K application to process 3,000 bytes of data > (regulatory.bin) in an embedded AP context where filesystem space is at > a premium. Would you prefer that being duplicated in kernel space by each driver? That's sort of what we had before. Each driver had their own regulatory solution. 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
