From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "John W. Linville" Subject: Re: [patch] d80211: use pfifo_qdisc_ops rather than d80211-specific qdisc Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 09:20:28 -0500 Message-ID: <20061101142022.GC21668@tuxdriver.com> References: <20061026050416.GB14199@havoc.gtf.org> <20061101112805.246e1b3b@griffin.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Simon Barber , Jeff Garzik , Patrick McHardy , David Kimdon , netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from ra.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.52]:8718 "EHLO ra.tuxdriver.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1946900AbWKAOW4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Nov 2006 09:22:56 -0500 To: Jiri Benc Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061101112805.246e1b3b@griffin.suse.cz> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 11:28:05AM +0100, Jiri Benc wrote: > On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 22:15:23 -0700, Simon Barber wrote: > > Re: registering as a real protocol - yes this I have been going on about > > for a while. This needs a few changes in how things work: > > > > 1. Register as a real protocol. > > 2. Change drivers to use netif_rx to receive frames (will also be more > > efficient) > > This is something I really want too. I see Simon's suggestions in the category of making wireless devices "1st class citizens". I mostly agree with his suggestions, and they are "on my list". Do we see these as merge requirements? I have them as a lower priority than locking analysis/fixes, cfg80211 migration, fullmac support, and driver porting. Is this agreeable? Or do we think this needs to happen before a merge to -mm? John -- John W. Linville linville@tuxdriver.com