On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 00:23 +0400, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote: > > That return value is strange. > > The idea is that tx function can return info about errors during > transmit (busy channel, no ACK, etc). Well, TX functions don't usually wait for anything so busy channel or no ack wouldn't be possible to return there but more like a TX status, and I think people are more used to NETDEV_TX_OK etc. return values. But it's your choice to make, obviously. If you want to return specific information like that though I would recommend making an enum so you get at least some type checking (and things like 'return -1' are more obviously wrong). > > We've had no end to trouble with the master netdev, I suggest you look > > into the current mac80211 code and see if you can get rid of it. > > What troubles w/ master netdev did you have had? I do still see the > master devices in mac80211. IIUC, it's planned to replace (from > management point of view) the mdev with wiphy instance, isn't it? Mostly the userspace API was a mess, and you can't actually _do_ anything with the master netdev. It also doesn't see all the frames, only outgoing. It's very strange. Yes, you still see it in the current tree, but it's gone in our -next tree. The biggest problem is that it really clutters up the userspace API since you can't do any netdev things with it, it's just a placeholder. In addition to that, you can't put anything into skb->cb, then push the frame to the master netdev, and expect things in skb->cb to still be there when the frame arrives at the master netdev. Not sure you do that (I hope not because that would be very buggy), but eventually you'll probably find that you do want that, etc. IMHO it's just better practise to not use it in situations like this where it can't be really used as a netdev. > Hmm. I thought that one may be able to rmmod the module w/ ops while the > device is still hanging in the system. On the other hand, ops are > provided by the driver, so if one rmmods the driver and the device is > still there, it's a bug... Exactly. You _want_ to be able to rmmod the module and have it unregister itself. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
