From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean Tourrilhes Subject: Re: [RFC] Alternate WE-21 support (core API) Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 09:13:45 -0700 Message-ID: <20060908161345.GA27036@bougret.hpl.hp.com> References: <20060830005655.GA8405@bougret.hpl.hp.com> <1157031138.16040.17.camel@ux156> <20060831135112.GA6097@jm.kir.nu> <1157032805.16040.21.camel@ux156> <20060906205538.GA29767@tuxdriver.com> <20060906213053.GA21719@bougret.hpl.hp.com> <20060908142913.GD23852@tuxdriver.com> Reply-To: jt@hpl.hp.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Johannes Berg , Jouni Malinen , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Javier Achirica , Simon Kelley , "James P. Ketrenos" , Zhu Yi , Pavel Roskin , "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Jeroen Vreeken , Michael Wu , Denis Vlasenko , Michael Buesch Return-path: Received: from madara.hpl.hp.com ([192.6.19.124]:3307 "EHLO madara.hpl.hp.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750900AbWIHQT5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Sep 2006 12:19:57 -0400 To: "John W. Linville" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060908142913.GD23852@tuxdriver.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 10:29:23AM -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 02:30:53PM -0700, Jean Tourrilhes wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 04:55:44PM -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > > > > + * V20 to V21 > > > + * ---------- > > > + * - Remove (struct net_device *)->get_wireless_stats() > > > + * - Change length in ESSID and NICK to strlen() instead of strlen()+1 > > > + * - Add IW_RETRY_SHORT/IW_RETRY_LONG retry modifiers > > > + * - Add explicit flag to tell stats are in 802.11k RCPI : IW_QUAL_RCPI > > > > Personally, I would also add this : > > > > + * - Power/Retry relative values no longer * 100000 > > > > Three reason : > > 1) It's a cleanup and does not add any new feature > > 2) It does not change the rest of the patches > > 3) Userspace part has already gone in distro, not > > including this bit would mean breaking userspace. > > Is there any code that corresponds to that? Or does the comment > simply indicate policy? There is no code in the core of the WE, so it only indicates policy. But, I believe policy change need to be documented. On the other hand you will find code in the tiacx patch. > > The other bits can be included at a later time ;-) > > Well, maybe. But, I think we should now consider WE to be in > maintenance mode. I think nl80211 is the future, as long as Johannes > delivers. We'll see. WE has been supposed to be replaced any time soon for the last 3 years. And I don't believe nl80211 will address legacy driver and non-802.11 hardware. > Thanks, > > John Thanks, and have fun... Jean