On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 18:48 +0300, Luciano Coelho wrote: > On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 16:59 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 16:58 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 07:50 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > > > > On 05/05/2011 07:51 AM, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 07:43 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > > > > >> On 05/05/2011 06:00 AM, Luciano Coelho wrote: > > > > >>> Introduce NL80211_ATTR_SCHED_SCAN_INTERVAL as a required attribute for > > > > >>> NL80211_CMD_START_SCHED_SCAN. This value informs the driver at which > > > > >>> intervals the scheduled scan cycles should be executed. > > > > >> > > > > >> Please default to something useful instead of requiring > > > > >> this so that things are backwards compatible. > > > > > > > > > > Backward compatible to what? > > > > > > > > To anything sending older style netlink messages? > > > > > > But this is a new feature, and a new command, so I don't quite > > > understand why an application would think it can send it without the > > > interval? > > > > Oh wait, I guess you're right, or this should just be part of patch 1 > > instead so we never have the feature without the requirement to have the > > interval given. > > Yeah, I could squish this with the previous patch (1/3), but I just > reckoned that patch was getting too big, so I decided to make a separate > one. > > If this whole patch series is taken at the same time, I guess there > won't be backwards compatibility problems (except for bisecting, > maybe?). > > Anyways, I'll leave it as your choice. Squishing the patch is easy > enough. ;) Ah, and one more thought... There's no driver implementing this at this point, so is there anything to really worry about? -- Cheers, Luca. -- 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
