From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@gmail.com>
Cc: Bruno Randolf <br1@einfach.org>,
johannes@sipsolutions.net, linville@tuxdriver.com,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] cfg80211: Add nl80211 antenna configuration
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 12:10:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C5699AE.6090103@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimoU+iF2bVJ-Fs4iT3k5v0iU9PaE783NhUdnQQ-@mail.gmail.com>
On 2010-08-02 11:52 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 2:32 AM, Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org> wrote:
>> On 2010-08-02 11:23 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>>> Sure, I just did not see any code for this in these patches. My point
>>> about the hw config vs fake/mod'd is if we'd expose the mod'd config
>>> changes to userspace or if we'd keep them internal to cfg80211. How
>>> would this be dealt with?
>> Right now, cfg80211 doesn't know enough to handle this stuff on its own,
>> so let's handle it in the driver completely on the first iteration. The
>> patches do not need any changes for this right now.
>
> I'd prefer that code to be written rather then let this be defined as
> API now and let drivers deal with this differently. But that's me, I'm
> not the maintainer, I just will not deal with bug reports dealing with
> this and I'll assign them to you guys if this gets through. Still
> think its crap and should just go through debugfs until all the code
> mentioned does exist.
Sorry, but WTF? There's two parts to this: API visible to user space,
and the internal API for handling changes.
So you're suggesting to reject the user space API, because of missing
parts in the internal API (which we can change any time) that will only
be used for drivers that this series doesn't even contain any code for??
Am I confused here, or does this seem rather strange?
- Felix
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-02 10:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-29 3:58 [PATCH v5] cfg80211: Add nl80211 antenna configuration Bruno Randolf
2010-07-29 6:12 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-07-29 7:48 ` Johannes Berg
2010-07-29 9:12 ` Bruno Randolf
2010-07-29 15:04 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-08-02 4:13 ` Bruno Randolf
2010-08-02 5:37 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-08-02 8:59 ` Felix Fietkau
2010-08-02 9:10 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-08-02 9:17 ` Felix Fietkau
2010-08-02 9:23 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-08-02 9:32 ` Felix Fietkau
2010-08-02 9:52 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-08-02 10:10 ` Felix Fietkau [this message]
2010-08-02 10:18 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-08-02 10:47 ` Felix Fietkau
2010-08-02 10:51 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-08-02 11:18 ` Felix Fietkau
2010-08-02 17:45 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2010-08-02 11:01 ` Johannes Berg
2010-08-02 11:19 ` Felix Fietkau
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=4C5699AE.6090103@openwrt.org \
--to=nbd@openwrt.org \
--cc=br1@einfach.org \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=mcgrof@gmail.com \
/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).