| To: | Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] Wireless extensions rethink |
| From: | Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 18 Jun 2004 18:54:56 -0400 |
| Cc: | jt@xxxxxxxxxx, jt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, gwingerde@xxxxxxx, sfeldma@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, jkmaline@xxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20040618151117.2f191d7f.akpm@osdl.org> |
| References: | <20040616204248.GA23617@bougret.hpl.hp.com> <40D0BD5B.201@pobox.com> <20040616223316.GA29618@bougret.hpl.hp.com> <40D0D265.3070804@pobox.com> <20040617174717.GA30460@bougret.hpl.hp.com> <40D1E185.2010201@pobox.com> <20040617185605.GA32216@bougret.hpl.hp.com> <40D1EC54.8000904@pobox.com> <20040617193154.GE32216@bougret.hpl.hp.com> <40D1F687.6030307@pobox.com> <20040617204644.GB3341@bougret.hpl.hp.com> <20040618151117.2f191d7f.akpm@osdl.org> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040510 |
Andrew Morton wrote:
Coming into this with my lateness exceeded only by my lack of context, I'd say that I share Jean's concern over making incompatible changes to the wireless user<->kernel interface at this time. If we can retain _both_ interfaces in 2.6, remove the old one in 2.7 then maybe that'll be OK. Two points: 1) This is about the _driver_ API. The userland interface is a different issue. In Linux the userland ABI is a holy grail that shouldn't be broken without warnings across major kernel versions. We can easily add netlink support (as Jean demonstrated) without 2) I won't break the stable kernel driver API, so you worries here are unfounded. But I do wonder whether this API is the uppermost issue with the wireless drivers. The driver API has got to go. Period. Just look at what a sample driver exports: It flat out doesn't work with object lifetime rules, taking _offsets_ in driver-local structs into more generic code. As for the wireless drivers themselves, they will change as the HostAP stuff gets integrated more closely into the kernel. There seem to be a lot of bug reports, and these drivers are *really* complex, and there are lots of out-of-tree drivers. Aren't these the things which we should be devoting cycles to? The driver API is one of the causes of complexity. Lack of direct integration into the net stack (see http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/jgarzik/patchkits/2.6/davem-p80211.tar.bz2 for an example direction) another cause of the complexity. As for out of tree drivers, just look at the web page. Most either (a) have binary-only BLOBs associated or (b) duplicate existing drivers N times. Outside the kernel tree there is no unification, but 3-4 drivers for _every_ wireless chipset. Jeff |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Iptables-1.2.9/10 compile failure with linux 2.6.7 headers, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [margitsw@t-online.de: Re: 2.6.7], Luis R. Rodriguez |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [RFC] Wireless extensions rethink, Andrew Morton |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [RFC] Wireless extensions rethink, Jeff Garzik |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |