Re: wireless: recap of current issues (compatibility)

[Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>]

> The netlink configuration mechanism needs compatibility code to
> translate wireless extension ioctls into netlink transactions.

I think we could restrict this to allow ioctl configuration only if
there's just a single active virtual dev [excluding some special cases
like changing the mode which would (see above) require deactivating one
and activating another virtual dev. or is that not possible without
screwing up naming etc? that might get tricky if we disallow mode
changing, but can probably be worked around easier than allowing mode
changing, especially since this is to be deprecated]

> Should a default wlan device be created at WiPHY init?  Should it
> enable translational bridging?  I'm inclined against this, but is it
> worthwhile for compatibility?  Could/should this be a configuration
> option for the stack?

If you want the old userspace API to 'just work' you have to create one
default wlan device at WiPHY init.

> How about if WiPHY initialization triggered a netlink broadcast?

It definitely should, in any case.

johannes

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part