netdev - Re: [PATCH v20 2/2] wireless: Initial driver submission for pureLiFi STA devices

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]

Date:   Thu, 28 Oct 2021 10:24:13 +0300
From:   Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To:     Kari Argillander <kari.argillander@...il.com>
Cc:     Srinivasan Raju <srini.raju@...elifi.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list\:NETWORKING DRIVERS \(WIRELESS\)" 
        <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list\:NETWORKING DRIVERS" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v20 2/2] wireless: Initial driver submission for pureLiFi STA devices

Kari Argillander <kari.argillander@...il.com> writes:

> On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 11:00:55AM +0100, Srinivasan Raju wrote:
>> This driver implementation has been based on the zd1211rw driver
>> 
>> Driver is based on 802.11 softMAC Architecture and uses
>> native 802.11 for configuration and management
>> 
>> The driver is compiled and tested in ARM, x86 architectures and
>> compiled in powerpc architecture
>
> Just small style issues in this review.

Very good review comments, kiitos :)

>> +static const struct ieee80211_ops plfxlc_ops = {
>> +	.tx                 = plfxlc_op_tx,
>> +	.start              = plfxlc_op_start,
>> +	.stop               = plfxlc_op_stop,
>> +	.add_interface      = plfxlc_op_add_interface,
>> +	.remove_interface   = plfxlc_op_remove_interface,
>> +	.set_rts_threshold  = purelifi_set_rts_threshold,
>> +	.config             = plfxlc_op_config,
>> +	.configure_filter   = plfxlc_op_configure_filter,
>> +	.bss_info_changed   = plfxlc_op_bss_info_changed,
>> +	.get_stats          = purelifi_get_stats,
>> +	.get_et_sset_count  = purelifi_get_et_sset_count,
>> +	.get_et_stats       = purelifi_get_et_stats,
>> +	.get_et_strings     = purelifi_get_et_strings,
>> +};
>
> Just asking why some prefixes are purelifi and some are plfxlc?

Good point, I guess this is because the driver was called purelifi
before. I think throughout the driver "plfxlc_" should be used and
"purelifi_" should be dropped altogether.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches