Return-path: Received: from mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net ([204.127.131.117]:50026 "EHLO mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161541AbXDLDl1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Apr 2007 23:41:27 -0400 Message-ID: <461DAABE.1060607@lwfinger.net> Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 22:42:54 -0500 From: Larry Finger MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dan Williams CC: Michael Wu , Michael Buesch , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcm43xx: Hide if bcm43xx-mac80211 is builtin References: <200704111901.06403.flamingice@sourmilk.net> <1176336070.1298.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1176336070.1298.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Dan Williams wrote: > On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 19:01 -0400, Michael Wu wrote: >> bcm43xx: Hide if bcm43xx-mac80211 is builtin >> >> From: Michael Wu >> >> This prevents users from compiling bcm43xx (softmac) and bcm43xx-mac80211 >> into the kernel at the same time. In the case that it is attempted, make >> bcm43xx (softmac) not build. > > What kernel version is this targetted at? Have the mac80211 bits > reached feature parity with the softmac bits? I'm still hearing quite a > few reports of mac80211 being flaky WRT WEXT implementation and > compatibility. I don't necessarily object, I just want to make sure > that when this patch hits released kernels, that the mac80211 port is in > the same or better shape than the softmac one. This is aimed at Linville's wireless-dev and the -mm tree where both softmac and mac80211 versions coexist. At the moment, mac80211 is not in as good shape as softmac, and a date for its addition to mainline has not been set. Larry