On 1/23/12 2:38 AM, Florian Fainelli wrote: > Hello, > > On 01/23/12 02:34, Philip Prindeville wrote: >> On 1/21/12 1:18 AM, Lee Essen wrote: >>> On 20 Jan 2012, at 23:47, Philip Prindeville wrote: >>> >>>> I'd sure like to see netlink being used to communicate speed/carrier >>>> changes up into userspace. >>>> >>> Unfortunately there's absolutely no netlink support in the lantiq driver >>> and I don't think any of that info is available elsewhere, I would have >>> thought trying to add a netlink capability would be a bit extreme? (and >>> probably well outside my capability) … and that would then need to be done >>> for every subsequent DSL driver to maintain standardisation. >>> >>> There is an ioctl interface, which also works without the daemon running, >>> which I did consider, but my thought was that this would require an extra >>> binary to maintain (unless there's a simple lua ioctl interface, but I >>> couldn't find one) and would have a lot less transparency than a script -- >>> but I'm happy to knock something up to make use of this if it's considered >>> a better approach. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Lee. >> There aren't that many DSL flavors out there... Danube, Solos, Viking... >> that's probably 90% of the market I'm guessing. > You missed all the BCM63xx SoCs, which represent 90% of the DSL market > actually, though their drivers are not opensource which is why people > tend to forget about them. > >> Once it gets done for one architecture, I'm sure someone on the linux-atm >> mailing list would port it to others. I might do it for the Solos if I have >> a working example of the netlink portion, then I can figure out how to >> interrogate the hardware for link quality changes. > Having a generic DSL stack in Linux will be quite some work from an > acceptance perspective because:
There might be a miscommunication: I wasn't talking about rewriting the DSL stack, but merely adding instrumentation to the existing drivers that would message into user-space any line status changes. -Philip > > - there are not only DSL ATM drivers in Linux (e.g: SoNET), and they > need to be supported too by this stack > > - there is only one "modern" DSL/ATM driver right now which is solos, I > am not sure Lantiq has any plans for mainlining their driver, rewriting > ar7-atm to fit into that model is also a lot of work > > Anyway, if you got that way, I think you could use generic netlink in > order to avoid the complexity of netlink and still have something useful. > -- > Florian _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
