From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752518AbbACW2v (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jan 2015 17:28:51 -0500 Received: from cpsmtpb-ews06.kpnxchange.com ([213.75.39.9]:65368 "EHLO cpsmtpb-ews06.kpnxchange.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750735AbbACW2r (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jan 2015 17:28:47 -0500 Message-ID: <1420324124.9624.60.camel@x220> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "ipw2200: select CFG80211_WEXT" From: Paul Bolle To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Marcel Holtmann , Stanislav Yakovlev , Kalle Valo , Jiri Kosina , linux-wireless , Network Development , Linux Kernel Mailing List Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2015 23:28:44 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <1420297188.2397.3.camel@tiscali.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4 (3.10.4-4.fc20) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Jan 2015 22:28:44.0564 (UTC) FILETIME=[A2598540:01D027A4] X-RcptDomain: vger.kernel.org Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2015-01-03 at 10:07 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Marcel Holtmann wrote: > > > > why would you revert this? It is obviously the correct change to actually select CFG80211_WEXT. > > I don't know about obvious, but yeah, I think the select in this case > is actually the better idea anyway. Obviously it wasn't obvious to me! My reasoning was that the "ipw2200: select CFG80211_WEXT" commit was _solely_ a workaround for the breakage introduced by that other patch. And since that one is now reverted the workaround wasn't needed anymore. Besied, I thought we try to avoid select-ing symbols that can also be set manually. As that makes it more likely to trigger circular dependency problems in the kconfig tools, doesn't it? > We could make the CFG80211_WEXT help message be very negative so that > people aren't encouraged to select it even if they can, but then if > they need the ipw driver it gets selected because of that. Because the > ipw driver is probably the more important of the two if you just > happen to have old hardware but are upgrading yout software (and > anybody who recompiles their own kernel is obviously doing the > latter). Side note: am I correct in thinking that there's some successor to CFG80211_WEXT and that the ipw2200 driver could, at least in theory, be ported to that successor? (ipw2200 hardware appears to be a bit old, so probably no one would care enough to actually do that.) net/wireless/kconfig doesn't mention anything like that, so probably I'm just confused. Paul Bolle