From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Bolle Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "ipw2200: select CFG80211_WEXT" Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 23:05:19 +0100 Message-ID: <1420495519.14308.29.camel@x220> References: <1420297188.2397.3.camel@tiscali.nl> <1420324124.9624.60.camel@x220> <54AA641C.7050307@broadcom.com> <1420479510.14308.23.camel@x220> (sfid-20150105_183907_807502_81C08416) <1420484224.9459.16.camel@sipsolutions.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Arend van Spriel , Linus Torvalds , Marcel Holtmann , Stanislav Yakovlev , Kalle Valo , Jiri Kosina , linux-wireless , Network Development , Linux Kernel Mailing List To: Johannes Berg Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1420484224.9459.16.camel-cdvu00un1VgdHxzADdlk8Q@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-wireless-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 19:57 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > Multiple other groups of ioctls could be converted in similar patches, > until at the end you can completely remove ipw_wx_handlers and rely > entirely on cfg80211's wext compatibility. > > So far the theory - in practice nobody cared enough to start working on > any of these drivers, let alone actually has the hardware today. So my suggestion to make ipw2200 no longer use cfg80211_wext_giwname() would actually be backwards. What's actually needed, in theory, is to use more of what's provided under CFG80211_WEXT (and, I guess, less of what's provided under WIRELESS_EXT). Did I get that right? Thanks, Paul Bolle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html