From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "John W. Linville" Subject: Re: [GIT]: Networking (WEXT events and 64/32 compat) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 09:41:13 -0400 Message-ID: <20080918134112.GB4552@tuxdriver.com> References: <20080908.204323.04156464.davem@davemloft.net> <20080909040525.GA26151@hostap.isc.org> <20080917191128.GA23239@hostap.isc.org> <20080917.131133.135282530.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: j@w1.fi, jouni.malinen@atheros.com, alex.williamson@hp.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080917.131133.135282530.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 01:11:33PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Jouni Malinen > Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:11:28 -0700 > > > Would it be acceptable to ever enable use of IWEVASSOCREQIE / > > IWEVSSOCRESPIE in kernel if the workaround were available in new > > wpa_supplicant versions? Or should we try to add a new WEXT event > > type that uses fixed size for the length field and then replace the old > > IWEVCUSTOM with the new type since IWEVCUSTOM does not work with > > 64/32-bit case (wpa_supplicant just knows how to avoid processing that > > bogus event data)? > > Moving to a new event with a strictly sized datastructure, instead of > one that has variable sized members like pointers and crap which are > impossible to compat layer'ify, is indeed my preference. > > But in that case, we might as well make nl80211 usable instead. This is, of course, my opinion as well. John -- John W. Linville linville@tuxdriver.com