From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-ew0-f210.google.com ([209.85.219.210]:62465 "EHLO mail-ew0-f210.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751673AbZF1Inz (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Jun 2009 04:43:55 -0400 Received: by ewy6 with SMTP id 6so4700734ewy.37 for ; Sun, 28 Jun 2009 01:43:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A472D47.7020906@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 09:43:51 +0100 From: Dave MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Johannes Berg CC: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC 00/11] cfg80211 connect API + wireless extension move References: <20090624120745.239294066@sipsolutions.net> <43e72e890906241324n341f4988wc6e7325ee389e71e@mail.gmail.com> <4A43E002.2060309@gmail.com> <1246050118.21314.82.camel@johannes.local> In-Reply-To: <1246050118.21314.82.camel@johannes.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 21:37 +0100, Dave wrote: > >> That removes the WE dependency from mac80211 but allows drivers to >> gradually implement cfg80211 support. I originally attempted doing it in >> one hit - that sucked, but may have been due to not having a clear idea >> of how cfg80211 is supposed to work. > > Another idea I just had is that we could do everything like my > internalise patch, but have an if (!netdev->wireless_handlers) before > the assignment. That way, people could still have their own wireless > handlers. I had that same thought... > Additionally, subject to a Kconfig symbol, we could still > export the handlers, something like this: > or something like that. Then drivers that are in transition could select > NEED_... and transition call by call even in the future after we switch > to the central model. Is it worth it? I don't know. Neat. I tend to prefer avoiding these indirections and keeping things clean. I'd vote (if I had one) to take the NEED_ behaviour now, and transition at some point. Thanks, Dave.