Hi Johannes,
> > Implements .set_monitor_enabled(wiphy, enabled).
> >
> > Notifies driver upon change of interface layout.
> >
> > If only monitor interfaces become present it is
> > called with 2nd argument being true. If
> > non-monitor interface appears then 2nd argument
> > is false. Driver is notified only upon change.
> >
> > This makes it more obvious about the fact that
> > cfg80211 supports single monitor channel. Once we
> > implement multi-channel we don't want to allow
> > setting monitor channel while other interface
> > types are running. Otherwise it would be ambiguous
> > once we start considering num_different_channels.
> >
> > Change-Id: Ibd82a70c256c2de584eb541ea2c36663a59f09d4
> > Signed-off-by: Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> This is essentially how mac80211 behaves now, and I have no problem
> imposing it on the rest of the stack as well, but I think we can
> probably get rid of some more generic functionality then?
>
> Like the software_iftypes. What if the driver actually wants us to track
> the monitor channel like any other context? Doesn't make any sense for
> mac80211, but before this it would have been possible.
>
> Essentially you're saying that monitor is always a software iftype, and
> that it should always behave like in mac80211 -- if it's alone then it's
> a monitor, if not alone it just sees what the others see.
>
> What do the others thing? Bing? Kalle?
mwifiex driver doesn't support monitor interface type currently. So any changes related to monitor shouldn't have any impact on mwifiex, AFAICS.
Thanks,
Bing
>
> The other thing we might then want to is make this more general and not
> just inform the driver about the monitor/no-monitor layout change, but
> also tell it which interface combination we're in right now? Might look
> a bit more like
>
> set_iface_combination(wiphy, dev, combination);
>
> or even
> set_iface_combination(wiphy, dev, combination, have_monitor);
>
>
> Then pure monitor would be "combination == NULL, have_monitor=True",
> etc. The only downside is that we don't have combinations advertised for
> when there's a single interface only, so we'd have to point to some
> internal single-interface combinations then (static in cfg80211).
> Thoughts?
>
> johannes
>
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���zW����ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
