linux-kernel - Re: libertas (private) ioctls vs. nl80211

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20070614125618.a7338ad8.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 14 Jun 2007 12:56:18 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	johannes@...solutions.net, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
	dcbw@...hat.com, hs4233@...l.mn-solutions.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, marcelo@...ck.org
Subject: Re: libertas (private) ioctls vs. nl80211

On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:09:36 -0400
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com> wrote:

> It does not make sense to me to rip this out purely for aesthetic
> reasons.

Aesthetics are good, but that's not the main issue.

What is most worrying is that there appears to be a risk that these
newly-added interfaces will later become obsoleted by another interface. 
This means that we'll need to maintain, test and support _both_ interfaces
for a very long time.  This is the sort of foot-shooting we should avoid.

-
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/