[RFC] make ieee80211 invisible

[RFC] make ieee80211 invisible

[Johannes Berg]

This makes CONFIG_IEEE80211 invisible. The drivers that require it
(ipw2100, ipw2200, hostap) select it, and everybody else really
shouldn't even think about using it. Also, since there really is
no point in compiling anything without crypto support these days,
remove the crypto options and just enable them, leaving only the
debugging option which only shows up when a driver is select that
requires it. This makes it hard to enable, but most people wouldn't
want to anyway.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
---
 net/ieee80211/Kconfig |   56 ++++++++++++++------------------------------------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)

--- everything.orig/net/ieee80211/Kconfig	2008-10-14 19:42:44.000000000 +0200
+++ everything/net/ieee80211/Kconfig	2008-10-14 19:45:13.000000000 +0200
@@ -1,12 +1,23 @@
 config IEEE80211
-	tristate "Generic IEEE 802.11 Networking Stack (DEPRECATED)"
+	tristate
+	select WIRELESS_EXT
+	select CRYPTO
+	select CRYPTO_ARC4
+	select CRYPTO_ECB
+	select CRYPTO_AES
+	select CRYPTO_MICHAEL_MIC
+	select CRYPTO_ECB
+	select CRC32
+	select IEEE80211_CRYPT_WEP
+	select IEEE80211_CRYPT_TKIP
+	select IEEE80211_CRYPT_CCMP
 	---help---
 	This option enables the hardware independent IEEE 802.11
 	networking stack.  This component is deprecated in favor of the
 	mac80211 component.
 
 config IEEE80211_DEBUG
-	bool "Enable full debugging output"
+	bool "Full debugging output for the old IEEE80211 stack"
 	depends on IEEE80211
 	---help---
 	  This option will enable debug tracing output for the
@@ -29,45 +40,10 @@ config IEEE80211_DEBUG
 	  subsystem, you most likely want to say N here.
 
 config IEEE80211_CRYPT_WEP
-	tristate "IEEE 802.11 WEP encryption (802.1x)"
-	depends on IEEE80211
-	select CRYPTO
-	select CRYPTO_ARC4
-	select CRYPTO_ECB
-	select CRC32
-	---help---
-	Include software based cipher suites in support of IEEE
-	802.11's WEP.  This is needed for WEP as well as 802.1x.
-
-	This can be compiled as a module and it will be called
-	"ieee80211_crypt_wep".
+	tristate
 
 config IEEE80211_CRYPT_CCMP
-	tristate "IEEE 802.11i CCMP support"
-	depends on IEEE80211
-	select CRYPTO
-	select CRYPTO_AES
-	---help---
-	Include software based cipher suites in support of IEEE 802.11i
-	(aka TGi, WPA, WPA2, WPA-PSK, etc.) for use with CCMP enabled
-	networks.
-
-	This can be compiled as a module and it will be called
-	"ieee80211_crypt_ccmp".
+	tristate
 
 config IEEE80211_CRYPT_TKIP
-	tristate "IEEE 802.11i TKIP encryption"
-	depends on IEEE80211
-	select WIRELESS_EXT
-	select CRYPTO
-	select CRYPTO_MICHAEL_MIC
-	select CRYPTO_ECB
-	select CRC32
-	---help---
-	Include software based cipher suites in support of IEEE 802.11i
-	(aka TGi, WPA, WPA2, WPA-PSK, etc.) for use with TKIP enabled
-	networks.
-
-	This can be compiled as a module and it will be called
-	"ieee80211_crypt_tkip".
-
+	tristate

Re: [RFC] make ieee80211 invisible

[Michael Buesch]

On Tuesday 14 October 2008 19:49:22 Johannes Berg wrote:
> 
> This makes CONFIG_IEEE80211 invisible. The drivers that require it
> (ipw2100, ipw2200, hostap) select it, and everybody else really
> shouldn't even think about using it. Also, since there really is
> no point in compiling anything without crypto support these days,
> remove the crypto options and just enable them, leaving only the
> debugging option which only shows up when a driver is select that
> requires it. This makes it hard to enable, but most people wouldn't
> want to anyway.

I think in the long term we should also rename it to ipw-ieee80211
and move it into another directory like drivers/net/wireless/ipw-ieee80211.
This way it's a lot less confusing for new developers joining the wireless developers.

(Probably also rename the symbols. I'm not sure if it's worth it, however)

-- 
Greetings Michael.

Re: [RFC] make ieee80211 invisible

[Johannes Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1424 bytes --]

On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 23:09 +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 October 2008 19:49:22 Johannes Berg wrote:
> > 
> > This makes CONFIG_IEEE80211 invisible. The drivers that require it
> > (ipw2100, ipw2200, hostap) select it, and everybody else really
> > shouldn't even think about using it. Also, since there really is
> > no point in compiling anything without crypto support these days,
> > remove the crypto options and just enable them, leaving only the
> > debugging option which only shows up when a driver is select that
> > requires it. This makes it hard to enable, but most people wouldn't
> > want to anyway.
> 
> I think in the long term we should also rename it to ipw-ieee80211
> and move it into another directory like drivers/net/wireless/ipw-ieee80211.
> This way it's a lot less confusing for new developers joining the wireless developers.

True. Also, imho we should reorganise:

net/ieee80211/* ->           drivers/net/wireless/ipw2x00/*
drivers/net/wireless/ipw* -> drivers/net/wireless/ipw2x00/*

but as long as the hostap drivers still needs this stuff...

> (Probably also rename the symbols. I'm not sure if it's worth it, however)

Heh, at least ieee80211_rx would be nice so it doesn't clash with
mac80211 any more (though we do have the header file trick which makes
ieee80211_rx usable in mac80211 drivers by virtue of being a static
inline)

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [RFC] make ieee80211 invisible

[reinette chatre]

On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 19:49 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> 
> This makes CONFIG_IEEE80211 invisible. The drivers that require it
> (ipw2100, ipw2200, hostap) select it, and everybody else really
> shouldn't even think about using it. Also, since there really is
> no point in compiling anything without crypto support these days,
> remove the crypto options and just enable them, leaving only the
> debugging option which only shows up when a driver is select that
> requires it. This makes it hard to enable, but most people wouldn't
> want to anyway.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
> ---

Very good idea. Not sure if you need an ack from us for this, but you
have mine in case you do.

Acked-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>

Thank you

Reinette

Re: [RFC] make ieee80211 invisible

[Johannes Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 964 bytes --]

On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 10:37 -0700, reinette chatre wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 19:49 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > 
> > This makes CONFIG_IEEE80211 invisible. The drivers that require it
> > (ipw2100, ipw2200, hostap) select it, and everybody else really
> > shouldn't even think about using it. Also, since there really is
> > no point in compiling anything without crypto support these days,
> > remove the crypto options and just enable them, leaving only the
> > debugging option which only shows up when a driver is select that
> > requires it. This makes it hard to enable, but most people wouldn't
> > want to anyway.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
> > ---
> 
> Very good idea. Not sure if you need an ack from us for this, but you
> have mine in case you do.
> 
> Acked-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>

Any pair of eyeballs is welcome either way! Thanks for looking.

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [RFC] make ieee80211 invisible

[Johannes Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 631 bytes --]

On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 19:49 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> 
> This makes CONFIG_IEEE80211 invisible. The drivers that require it
> (ipw2100, ipw2200, hostap) select it, and everybody else really
> shouldn't even think about using it. Also, since there really is
> no point in compiling anything without crypto support these days,
> remove the crypto options and just enable them, leaving only the
> debugging option which only shows up when a driver is select that
> requires it. This makes it hard to enable, but most people wouldn't
> want to anyway.

Do I have to repost to upgrade from [RFC] to [PATCH]?

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [RFC] make ieee80211 invisible

[John W. Linville]

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 12:46:55PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 19:49 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > 
> > This makes CONFIG_IEEE80211 invisible. The drivers that require it
> > (ipw2100, ipw2200, hostap) select it, and everybody else really
> > shouldn't even think about using it. Also, since there really is
> > no point in compiling anything without crypto support these days,
> > remove the crypto options and just enable them, leaving only the
> > debugging option which only shows up when a driver is select that
> > requires it. This makes it hard to enable, but most people wouldn't
> > want to anyway.
> 
> Do I have to repost to upgrade from [RFC] to [PATCH]?

This is fine, thanks. :-)

-- 
John W. Linville		Linux should be at the core
linville@tuxdriver.com			of your literate lifestyle.