Re: [RFC 00/11] cfg80211 connect API + wireless extension move

[Dave <kilroyd@googlemail.com>]

Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 21:37 +0100, Dave wrote:
> 
>> That removes the WE dependency from mac80211 but allows drivers to
>> gradually implement cfg80211 support. I originally attempted doing it in
>> one hit - that sucked, but may have been due to not having a clear idea
>> of how cfg80211 is supposed to work.
> 
> Another idea I just had is that we could do everything like my
> internalise patch, but have an if (!netdev->wireless_handlers) before
> the assignment. That way, people could still have their own wireless
> handlers.

I had that same thought...

> Additionally, subject to a Kconfig symbol, we could still
> export the handlers, something like this:

<snip>

> or something like that. Then drivers that are in transition could select
> NEED_... and transition call by call even in the future after we switch
> to the central model. Is it worth it? I don't know.

Neat. I tend to prefer avoiding these indirections and keeping things
clean. I'd vote (if I had one) to take the NEED_ behaviour now, and
transition at some point.


Thanks,

Dave.