On 06/11/2012 10:32 AM, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Sat, 2012-06-09 at 21:51 +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote: >> On 06/09/2012 09:55 AM, Johannes Berg wrote: >>> On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 17:51 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >>>> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> Turns out that standard Linux distributions leave >>>> CONFIG_EXPERT enabled. This makes this option useless for >>>> wireless testing / research purposes as we don't want certain >>>> features enabled on all kernel builds. This adds a new >>>> CONFIG_CFG80211_EXPERT and makes a few features depend on >>>> them. >>> >>> I'm not sure I see the point in CFG80211_EXPERT. All the features >>> you're putting in there have nothing to do with cfg80211 at all >>> anyway. >> >> My understanding of this is that CFG80211_EXPERT was chosen >> because cfg80211 provides the kernel side of the regulatory >> framework. > > It just happens though that the two options are related to regulatory > -- maybe then this should have a different name? It could be more than that, for example we could also add nl80211 testmode under CFG80211_EXPERT. > I still don't see the need. What would you put under it in > brcm[sf]mac? I certainly wouldn't see any reason to put anything > under it in our driver since it's much simpler to . Looks like something is missing here? > Also, the argument about distros doesn't really work that way, if > there are users interested in something then the distros will > certainly enable this (CFG80211_EXPERT) option to get something > hidden behind it. I would compare this with NL80211_TESTMODE, we don't want distributions to enable that either. Of course nothing prevents distros to enable CFG80211_EXPERT but we need to be active to make sure it's not enabled (ie. check the distro configs and file bugs etc). Kalle -- 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
