[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1159948179.2817.26.camel@ux156>
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 09:49:39 +0200
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc: "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, jt@....hp.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
Lee Revell <rlrevell@...-job.com>,
Alessandro Suardi <alessandro.suardi@...il.com>,
Norbert Preining <preining@...ic.at>, hostap@...oo.com,
ipw3945-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: wpa supplicant/ipw3945, ESSID last char missing
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 19:16 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> OK, I'm going to ask a stupid question. Why is the kernel<->wireless
> driver interface have to be tied to the userspace<->wireless
> interface?
Haha. Because Jean thinks it isn't and thus everything is fine. But in
reality it is.
> Is there some reason why this would be too hard to do with the current
> interface?
Yes: drivers are expected to mostly handle the ioctls directly without a
layer between them and userspace.
> Or is the arguement that if you're going to invest that
> much energy in fixing the userspace interface code, you would rather
> go to d80211/nl80211?
cfg80211 and nl80211 actually do this abstraction, nl80211 gets requests
and rewrites them to cfg80211 structures that are passed to the driver.
I have plans for wext/cfg80211 compat code, essentially replacing the
interface between the drivers and wext by cfg80211 and letting userspace
not even be aware of it.
johannes
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists