From: Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>
To: Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, John W Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] hostap: remove private "monitor" ioctl
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 17:48:28 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080528144828.GA6744@jm.kir.nu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1211981429.31989.29.camel@dv>
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 09:30:29AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> The old ioctl was supporting bare 802.11, prism and AVS headers. I want
> to replace all three of them with radiotap. I had to leave bare 802.11
> support for the AP interface (wlan0ap) for hostapd compatibility, but
> the main interface should only support radiotap.
>
> Suppose we want to support the old ioctl. All three types of headers
> that could be requested are going away now. Can we expect the software
> that doesn't know of "iwconfig mode monitor" to know radiotap headers?
> I don't think so.
Where is this "are going away now" statement coming from? I see no
technical reason for this apart from simplifying the implementation.
> > this may break existing user space programs, I do not think this should
> > go in. Obviously, same goes for removal of the actual use of this
> > parameter and support for different header formats in patch 5/5. Adding
> > support for radiotap format is of course reasonable, but I would be more
> > careful with removing existing functionality which may still be in use.
>
> OK, if that's what you prefer, I can do it.
I'm not strongly against replacing the old formats with radiotap, but I
just do not follow the logic given as reasons for doing this as a simple
replacement instead of doing it in steps (add radiotap now; remove
deprecated formats later).
I do not know how common user space programs that do not support
radiotap, but would support one (or more) of the old formats (and
similarly for the private ioctl vs. generic mode ioctl). If these kinds
of cases are very rare, I could see better justification for simple
replacement. If such programs are still in active use in systems that
could be expected to upgrade to the new kernel version, there is much
more justification to keep the old formats available and just make it
clearer that they are deprecated and will be removed at a certain point
in the future.
--
Jouni Malinen PGP id EFC895FA
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-28 14:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-23 1:54 [PATCH 1/5] hostap: fix sparse warnings Pavel Roskin
2008-05-23 1:54 ` [PATCH 2/5] hostap: fix references to 8802.11 Pavel Roskin
2008-05-26 9:38 ` Jouni Malinen
2008-05-23 1:54 ` [PATCH 3/5] hostap: remove private "monitor" ioctl Pavel Roskin
2008-05-26 9:44 ` Jouni Malinen
2008-05-28 13:30 ` Pavel Roskin
2008-05-28 14:48 ` Jouni Malinen [this message]
2008-05-23 1:55 ` [PATCH 4/5] hostap: don't report useless WDS frames by default Pavel Roskin
2008-05-23 1:55 ` [PATCH 5/5] hostap: add radiotap support, always use it in monitor mode Pavel Roskin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080528144828.GA6744@jm.kir.nu \
--to=j@w1.fi \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=proski@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).