On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. ÂSo, 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. Since this shit was merged can you add a respective documentation extension for the command for nl80211.h? 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
