From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.172]:60296 "EHLO ns3.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755849Ab1ERXak (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 May 2011 19:30:40 -0400 Message-ID: <4DD4569C.7080303@candelatech.com> (sfid-20110519_013043_489742_71FE78A5) Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 16:30:36 -0700 From: Ben Greear MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Johannes Berg CC: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] wireless: Support can-scan-one logic. References: <1305586296-23147-1-git-send-email-greearb@candelatech.com> (sfid-20110517_005202_689056_9240F1AF) <1305759738.8827.6.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> In-Reply-To: <1305759738.8827.6.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 05/18/2011 04:02 PM, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 15:51 -0700, greearb@candelatech.com wrote: >> From: Ben Greear >> >> 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. So, 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. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com