Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 21:37 +0100, Dave wrote: > >> That removes the WE dependency from mac80211 but allows drivers to >> gradually implement cfg80211 support. I originally attempted doing it in >> one hit - that sucked, but may have been due to not having a clear idea >> of how cfg80211 is supposed to work. > > Another idea I just had is that we could do everything like my > internalise patch, but have an if (!netdev->wireless_handlers) before > the assignment. That way, people could still have their own wireless > handlers. I had that same thought... > Additionally, subject to a Kconfig symbol, we could still > export the handlers, something like this: <snip> > or something like that. Then drivers that are in transition could select > NEED_... and transition call by call even in the future after we switch > to the central model. Is it worth it? I don't know. Neat. I tend to prefer avoiding these indirections and keeping things clean. I'd vote (if I had one) to take the NEED_ behaviour now, and transition at some point. Thanks, Dave. -- 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
