Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:57042 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751805AbYESP5y (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2008 11:57:54 -0400 Subject: Re: [RFC] make wext wireless bits optional and deprecate them From: Dan Williams To: Johannes Berg Cc: Marcel Holtmann , netdev , Jean Tourrilhes , linux-wireless , Linux Kernel list In-Reply-To: <1211211547.6252.54.camel@johannes.berg> References: <1211026337.3827.25.camel@johannes.berg> (sfid-20080517_154639_384202_6D3479C2) <1211032475.6252.2.camel@johannes.berg> <1211117795.686.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1211199368.6252.19.camel@johannes.berg> <1211210686.12187.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1211211547.6252.54.camel@johannes.berg> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 11:53:58 -0400 Message-Id: <1211212438.12187.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> (sfid-20080519_175815_770712_9188F80D) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 17:39 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 11:24 -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > > On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 14:16 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > Instead of testing for wireless/, best thing would probably be to call > > > > SIOCGIWRANGE on the device and if it returns EOPNOTSUP then it's not > > > > wireless. Some drivers may have to load firmware to figure out > > > > supported rates and encryption capabilities, but to be honest, NM does > > > > this to detect wireless devices and I haven't run into any issues in 4 > > > > years using it. If there are issues with drivers, then we need to fix > > > > the driver too. > > > > > > I was about to propose calling SIOCGIWNAME since that is what > > > wireless-tools do and that linux/wireless.h indicates. > > > > Hmm; NAME is pretty useless. That's fine to do, I guess WEXT requires > > that NAME return _something_ at least. NAME should never ever be used > > for anything more, but since wireless-tools appears to do this that's > > fine. > > Yes, I realise it is completely useless, but wext seems to require that > it be implemented. RANGE would work as well but typically has much more > complexity in the kernel. Yup; NAME's better for this even though it's useless. Dan