From: Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 20:40:47 +0530
> I'm also in favor of merging the devicescape code, but I don't see it > happening without somebody taking care to provide all the required > levels of interfaces (I see at least three levels of API's that a wireless > driver would need, depending on how much stuff is done in > hardware/firmware and how much in software. I hate to say this, but part of the problem is exactly the fact that all the implementors have implemented different levels of hardware-MAC'ness in their wireless products. Stated even further, things might have been more consistent if M$ had specified a set of driver interfaces into their own softmac stack, which I am to understand they are working on now. So every M$ wireless driver essentially links in their own softmac stack, if needed. This has resulted in a complicated situation for an already complicated technology. Therefore, the fact that it's taking this long to accomodate all of the cases in the vanilla tree is quite understandable. I'm at the point where I frankly don't care which softmac implementation we go with, but rather I'm more concerned that we pick _ONE_ and just stick with it, and then adding the necessary interfaces and infrastructure as different wireless devices require. Yes, you hear me right, it's more important to agree to one implementation as the basis, even if it's the worst one currently. Division of labor is something we simply cannot afford on the wireless stack at this time. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
