From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from charlotte.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.58]:36074 "EHLO smtp.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752372Ab1FTTbb (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:31:31 -0400 Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:24:18 -0400 From: "John W. Linville" To: Kalle Valo Cc: Johannes Berg , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/27] mac80211: create mac80211_ prefix Message-ID: <20110620192418.GB2251@tuxdriver.com> (sfid-20110620_213135_490116_4E855EA3) References: <20110613223029.10517.52197.stgit@localhost6.localdomain6> <1f42877e8c429b956640a6e9d97127fc@secure.sipsolutions.net> <87mxhg1zmb.fsf@purkki.adurom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <87mxhg1zmb.fsf@purkki.adurom.net> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 02:11:40PM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: > Johannes Berg writes: > > > On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:34:28 +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: > > > >> In this patchset I first fix some issues I found from the drivers, > >> then create mac80211-compat.h to make the transition as smooth as > >> possible and then start changing mac80211 itself. > > > > FWIW, I don't mind the rename, but I don't like the compat.h thing. > > The transition won't be smoothed by this, it just means the transition > > will drag out as things conflict etc. > > My plan was that I will finish the transition and remove > mac80211-compat.h before the next merge window. That way the file > would not be in any of the official releases. > > > If we want to rename, we'll need to bite the bullet eventually > > anyway. > > What do you suggest here? So that we should rename everything (both > mac80211 and 19 drivers) in one go? If we do that, we would have to do > everything in one patch to not break bisect, and it would be huge. > > With mac80211-compat.h it's possible to break down the patches into > small pieces. This makes it easier to create the patches and, most > importantly, review them. > > I'm willing to work on that huge patch if we so decide, but I'm not > sure if that's the correct way. > > Ah, while writing this I realised that I could instead rename symbols > in mac80211.h one at a time and that way the patches would be smaller. > Did you mean that? Is there going to be another spin of this? I had trouble applying patch 5 -- maybe this is something that is best handled with a pull request? John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.