Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 1 Jan 2015 13:25:50 +0100 | From | Arend van Spriel <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Revert "cfg80211: make WEXT compatibility unselectable" |
| |
On 01/01/15 11:56, Andreas Hartmann wrote: > Arend van Spriel wrote: >> On 12/31/14 16:14, Andreas Hartmann wrote: > [...] >>> All in all: >>> If you want to get rid of wext, you still have to go a *very* long way >>> to get the same *stable* and high throughput quality with *all* chips >>> depending on mac80211 and not just a few flagship drivers like Atheros. >> >> Hi Andreas, >> >> That's a nice list of unrelated stuff. This has all nothing to do with >> WEXT. Actually, you can build rt5572sta with cfg80211 support >> (RT_CFG80211_SUPPORT). > > You seem to know sources I don't know off. Could you please tell me, > where to find them? > > I have DPO_RT5572_LinuxSTA_2.6.0.1_20120629 which doesn't compile with > HAS_CFG80211_SUPPORT=y because -DCONFIG_AP_SUPPORT, on which > RT_CFG80211_SUPPORT relies, is broken. > > DPO_RT5572_LinuxSTA_2.6.1.3_20121022 removed the necessary broken AP > code completely.
Nice.
>> This thread is about the configuration API and >> not about driver performance. > > I know. > > I tried to show, why WEXT as a whole is still necessary even if there is > a mac80211 based driver, because of the weakness of rt2800usb: > Nip it in the bud.
Yes. WEXT needs to stay for a while. Not arguing that. Just saying this is really about cfg80211 providing "WEXT compatibility" so WEXT user-space apps can interact with cfg80211-based drivers and how to come up with a plan to phase out "WEXT compatibility", not WEXT.
Regards, Arend
> Kind regards, > Andreas
| |