[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFC] Wireless extensions rethink

To: jt@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [RFC] Wireless extensions rethink
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 17:36:27 -0400
Cc: Gertjan van Wingerde <gwingerde@xxxxxxx>, sfeldma@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, jkmaline@xxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20040616204248.GA23617@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <C6F5CF431189FA4CBAEC9E7DD5441E0103AF626C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <40CF263E.70009@xxxxxxx> <1087377197.25912.54.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <40D08769.3070106@xxxxxxx> <20040616204248.GA23617@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040510
Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
        Seriously, these are my thoughts :
        o Backward/forward compatibility has always be my number one
priority since 1996. There is many wireless drivers *NOT* in the
kernel (see my web page) and many utilities using the current API. For
example, both the Red-Hat configurator and the Debian installer link
with libiw. So, it's not just about rewritting iwconfig.

This is something on which we'll have to agree to disagree.

In Linux we are free to improve the APIs :)

        I also asked Jeff why he want to redesign the API, and in the
end there was only two issues :
        1) type-safe handler versus generic handler. I personally
disagree with Jeff on that one. But, you can easilly fix it by
offering wrapper to the current API :

I think I explained myself better, in the recent post in this thread. Such a wrapper does nothing to move the locking, ioctl marshalling, and security checks out of the drivers.

ethtool_ops and net/core/ethtool.c were quantum-leap improvements over the ethtool handling code that existed to that point. Wireless needs to make the same quantum leap.

        2) The use of ioctls. I've created a patch to add RtNetlink
support to the Wireless Extension API, and so far nobody has commented
on this :
        A more recent/functional version of this patch is on my web
page. I'm not going to waste time on this if nobody cares.

Well, I liked the patch at least :)

Take your patch, add new 'struct wireless_ops', convert existing wireless handlers, and we're good to go :)


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>