Re: libertas (private) ioctls vs. nl80211

From: Dan Williams
Date: Thu Jun 14 2007 - 18:19:35 EST

On Thu, 2007-06-14 at 14:48 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >>> I suspect that the probability of your proposal succeeding would be increased
> >>> if you could prepare a patch...
> >> Here we go:
> >
> > I don't mind ripping them out, but it makes sense only if people are
> > actually signed up to implementing this on a higher layer. As such, I'd
> > need to get a sign-off from somebody actually involved in wireless mesh
> > stuff etc.
> Correct me if I'm wrong, linux-wireless, but AFAIK there has never been
> a single post or line of code written for a generic wireless _mesh_
> interface.
> My general sentiment is -- remove the pointless and iw-duplicated
> ioctls, but leave the mesh ones that won't see generic counterparts for
> years.

And that's what I did in the last pull you got from John; all pointless
and duplicated ioctls were removed. The only ones left are mesh
tweakables, an LED GPIO control ioctl, and a regulatory region/domain
thing. I agree the interface is somewhat ugly (like the
char-128/char-128 ones that return information from the mesh forwarding
table), and I also agree that we need to move to using netlink for this
sort of stuff in the future. There are _no_ ioctls that duplicate WEXT


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at