Return-path: Received: from c60.cesmail.net ([216.154.195.49]:16819 "EHLO c60.cesmail.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757589AbYFZTTt (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:19:49 -0400 Subject: Re: [Q] ath5k : doesn't support AP mode? From: Pavel Roskin To: "John W. Linville" Cc: Michael Buesch , Stefanik =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E1bor?= , Johannes Berg , cs010101@gmail.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20080626173645.GB22075@tuxdriver.com> References: <002901c8d737$e51bb2f0$3b0aa8c0@39fb6b6b6f434b3> <69e28c910806260846s3b02cdddlca3ac138acadd8bd@mail.gmail.com> <1214496086.30722.14.camel@dv> <200806261821.31643.mb@bu3sch.de> <20080626173645.GB22075@tuxdriver.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:08:08 -0400 Message-Id: <1214503688.18039.9.camel@dv> (sfid-20080626_212020_866164_AA52A4D9) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2008-06-26 at 13:36 -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > I dunno...that last thing I want is to let this go in and then be > locked-in to the current API no-matter-what like we now are with WEXT. Is there any API that needs to be _changed_ (not added) for AP support? I understand it may be hard to anticipate future needs, but some things should be clear at this point already. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin