From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:60681 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752579AbYHGTyC (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Aug 2008 15:54:02 -0400 Subject: Re: [RFC] cfg80211: keep track of supported interface modes From: Dan Williams To: Johannes Berg Cc: John Linville , linux-wireless In-Reply-To: <1218138465.3630.60.camel@johannes.berg> References: <1218122495.3630.2.camel@johannes.berg> <1218132788.15728.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1218138465.3630.60.camel@johannes.berg> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 15:55:37 -0400 Message-Id: <1218138937.32083.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> (sfid-20080807_215407_783505_BBE815ED) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 21:47 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 14:13 -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 17:21 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > It is obviously good for userspace to know up front which interface modes > > > a given piece of hardware might support (even if adding such an interface > > > might fail later because of concurrency issues), so let's make cfg80211 > > > aware of that. For good measure, disallow adding interfaces in all other > > > modes so drivers don't forget to announce support for one mode when they > > > add it. > > > > This makes me happy. > > We discussed this in Ottawa, didn't we? It just slipped my mind and I > remembered earlier today. Yep, we did. Dan > No somebody just needs to go through and add the corresponding hunks for > all drivers. *hint* :) (it mostly consists in seeing what the > add_interface callback will accept, which is correct for all drivers but > iwlwifi as far as I know) > > johannes