From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [patch] d80211: use pfifo_qdisc_ops rather than d80211-specific qdisc Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 19:30:01 -0500 Message-ID: <45493C09.9050707@garzik.org> References: <20061026050416.GB14199@havoc.gtf.org> <20061101112805.246e1b3b@griffin.suse.cz> <20061101142022.GC21668@tuxdriver.com> <4548E7F7.7030100@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "John W. Linville" , Jiri Benc , Simon Barber , Patrick McHardy , David Kimdon , netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:58523 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752614AbWKBAaS (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Nov 2006 19:30:18 -0500 To: James Ketrenos In-Reply-To: <4548E7F7.7030100@linux.intel.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org James Ketrenos wrote: > If people have issues with with specific components of d80211 prior to > its merging, stand up and state what they are and how not fixing them > would negatively impact people that aren't using the d80211 subsystem. > > Don't take the above as me saying there aren't items that need to be > fixed/improved in d80211 -- there is work to be done. But that > shouldn't stop it from being merged w/ the EXPERIMENTAL flag set. > We reached the point where we should be in -mm a long time ago as soon > as both stacks could exist concurrently. d80211 should have been in > Linus' tree a long time ago. d80211 merge stoppers: - SMP issues (lack of locking, and overlocking via use of Big Network Lock) - userspace ABI It definitely shouldn't go upstream without that stuff. Jeff