Return-path: Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]:36560 "EHLO fencepost.gnu.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1423726AbXD3Vsv (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Apr 2007 17:48:51 -0400 Received: from proski by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Hidh3-0001Kl-JO for linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 30 Apr 2007 17:46:01 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: mark as experimental From: Pavel Roskin To: Jiri Benc Cc: Linux Wireless , "John W. Linville" In-Reply-To: <20070430201742.1f53aa40@griffin.suse.cz> References: <20070430201742.1f53aa40@griffin.suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 17:48:43 -0400 Message-Id: <1177969723.26986.30.camel@dv> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 20:17 +0200, Jiri Benc wrote: > Make the stack depend on EXPERIMENTAL. Also, change the name from "dscape" > to "mac80211". Why is it needed to make mac80211 EXPERIMENTAL? With mac80211 already in Ubuntu 7.04 and in the forthcoming Fedora 7, it must have received more testing than some drivers not marked as EXPERIMENTAL. I don't think enabling mac80211 per se would destabilize the kernel. Individual drivers could be marked experimental. In particular, bcm43xx_mac80211 needs such designation, since the softmac version is much better currently. If we encourage enabling mac80211, it would make it easier for the users to compile and test mac80211 based drivers, such as iwlwifi. Even bcm43xx_mac80211 could be packaged separately to allow compilation against an existing kernel for the users who want to test it without upgrading the kernel. In my opinion, marking mac80211 as EXPERIMENTAL would hinder testing of mac80211 drivers without having any positive effect on the users who want stability. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin