![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-10-04 09:53 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||