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: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 09:06:54 -0500 Message-ID: <20061102140648.GA32377@tuxdriver.com> References: <20061026050416.GB14199@havoc.gtf.org> <20061101112805.246e1b3b@griffin.suse.cz> <20061101142022.GC21668@tuxdriver.com> <4548E7F7.7030100@linux.intel.com> <20061102121657.GA13468@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: James Ketrenos , Jiri Benc , Simon Barber , Jeff Garzik , Patrick McHardy , David Kimdon , netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from ra.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.52]:49418 "EHLO ra.tuxdriver.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752897AbWKBOKR (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Nov 2006 09:10:17 -0500 To: Christoph Hellwig Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061102121657.GA13468@infradead.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 12:16:57PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > The most important merge requirement is to not break userspace. That means > proper support of WE (hopefully via cfg80211), and a single ethX network > device. The second most important is proper smp support, or good code > quality in general. We can't afford to merge buggy code. Third most > important is to make sure it's a full replacment for the current ieee80211 > code - for the softmac cards that's mostly trivial, but the half-hard mac > old intel cards are hard. That's where intel comes into play because you > support that hardware _and_ are pushing for d80211. That makes your team > pretty much volunteer to fix that up in my eyes. +1 This aligns very well with my position. John -- John W. Linville linville@tuxdriver.com