On 05/18/2011 04:02 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 15:51 -0700, greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Ben Greear<greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Enable this by passing a -1 for a scan frequency.
I still don't think we should do that, especially not with -1. That's
totally non-netlink like inband signalling. I'll also reply to your
other mail though since I don't think it makes sense to have this sort
of convenience function in the kernel.
It's virtually impossible (as far as I can tell) to carry an
out-of-tree netlink patch that uses a new netlink message
and still keep things backwards-compat when someone adds a
new message to the upstream kernel. So, the -1 hack works
well for me.
If it were to go into the kernel proper, then we could
add a proper flag to the netlink API and start using
that.
If you just don't like the feature, thats OK...it is a pretty
specialized feature, and easy enough to carry in my own tree.
Thanks,
Ben
--
Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
--
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
