From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from he.sipsolutions.net ([78.46.109.217]:41887 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756678Ab2JWHWl (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2012 03:22:41 -0400 Message-ID: <1350976995.10322.2.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20121023_092244_631398_249B60FF) Subject: Re: Add option to have more than one process listen for beacons per wiphy? From: Johannes Berg To: Ben Greear Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 09:23:15 +0200 In-Reply-To: <5085DB66.7020400@candelatech.com> (sfid-20121023_014858_488231_EE4955D4) References: <5085DB66.7020400@candelatech.com> (sfid-20121023_014858_488231_EE4955D4) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2012-10-22 at 16:48 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > A simple means would be a fixed-length array of nlpids (with max of maybe > 16 or so). Or, could do a variable length array, or list, or some other > way to register more than one at a time. If it were up to me, I'd choose > a fixed-length array just to keep the code simple. > > Any opinions on this? Fixed-length seems like a bad idea, you'll eventually complain about it again :P A list of small structures like the management frame registrations seems like the best option? Alternatively, we could have a new multicast group but that'd also require hostapd changes. johannes