Hi all,
I've been working a bit more on my current set of Wireless
Extension patches (WPA, Wireless-RtNetlink, ...). I've just updated
them on my personal web page :
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Jean_Tourrilhes/Linux/Tools.html#wext
The main change is that I'm now happy of the format of
Wireless over RtNetlink, so it should be close to definitive. I've
also split all the minor changes as a separate patch (WE-17), so it
doesn't have to wait for WPA and Wireless-RtNetlink that still need a
bit of work, and I plan to push this patch soon.
You will also find patches for various drivers to take
advantage of the new features. I would like to thank the various
driver authors that sent me patches, suggestions and comments, and
thank them for their patience.
Have fun...
Jean
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 09:23:39AM -0700, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've been working a bit more on my current set of Wireless
> Extension patches (WPA, Wireless-RtNetlink, ...). I've just updated
> them on my personal web page :
> http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Jean_Tourrilhes/Linux/Tools.html#wext
>
> The main change is that I'm now happy of the format of
> Wireless over RtNetlink, so it should be close to definitive. I've
> also split all the minor changes as a separate patch (WE-17), so it
> doesn't have to wait for WPA and Wireless-RtNetlink that still need a
> bit of work, and I plan to push this patch soon.
> You will also find patches for various drivers to take
> advantage of the new features. I would like to thank the various
> driver authors that sent me patches, suggestions and comments, and
> thank them for their patience.
Regardless of our recent discussions, I do want to emphasize that I wish
to maintain the current WE, and its backwards compatibility, for the
current 2.6.x stable series at the very least.
So please don't be discouraged from submitting WE patches...
Jeff
P.S. do associated userland wireless-tools patches exist to make use of
netlink? i.e. how have you been testing it?
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 03:45:25PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> Regardless of our recent discussions, I do want to emphasize that I wish
> to maintain the current WE, and its backwards compatibility, for the
> current 2.6.x stable series at the very least.
>
> So please don't be discouraged from submitting WE patches...
No problem Jeff ;-) Because of my wife, I have learned to
compromise (I just wish she had learned that as well). I already told
you that the actual delivery mechanism to the driver doesn't matter to
me, what matter to me is the vocabulary and gramar of the API. And
also I want to satisfy the need of both driver authors and userspace.
So, we are aiming for the same goal, just having slightly
different methods.
I plan to submit WE-17 to you somewhat soon, because Jouni
needs it, and I've postponed it far too much. There is actually one
change in WE-17 that you should appreciate. WPA and RtNetlink will go
when they are ready, for WPA it depends on Jouni, for RtNetlink on me.
> Jeff
>
>
> P.S. do associated userland wireless-tools patches exist to make use of
> netlink? i.e. how have you been testing it?
Good catch ;-)
There are some advantage to RtNetlink. Unfortunately,
simplicity is not one. Dealing with RtNetlink is a lot of work
compared to ioctl, as you may discover if you migrate your API to it.
I have a pretty simple test app. I'm working on a version of
iwlib that would go through RtNetlink, that would enable the full
Wireless Tools to use RtNetlink. I'll try to release that soon.
Have fun...
Jean