Return-path: Received: from mail-gh0-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:39084 "EHLO mail-gh0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751678Ab2FOQxY (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:53:24 -0400 Received: by ghrr11 with SMTP id r11so2493219ghr.19 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 09:53:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4FDB5E52.1020608@qca.qualcomm.com> References: <1339203070-17979-1-git-send-email-rodrigue@qca.qualcomm.com> <1339228530.4539.0.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> <4FD3A936.8070600@broadcom.com> <1339399952.4520.13.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> <4FD60369.80108@qca.qualcomm.com> <1339425944.4520.27.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> <20120614193104.GD32257@tux> <1339748211.4512.6.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> <4FDAF096.200@qca.qualcomm.com> <4FDB1740.60707@broadcom.com> <4FDB5E52.1020608@qca.qualcomm.com> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 09:53:03 -0700 Message-ID: (sfid-20120615_185328_195463_A155D9DC) Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] wireless: add CONFIG_CFG80211_EXPERT To: Kalle Valo Cc: Arend van Spriel , Johannes Berg , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, me@bobcopeland.com, mickflemm@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: > On 06/15/2012 02:06 PM, Arend van Spriel wrote: >> On 06/15/2012 10:21 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: >>> On 06/15/2012 11:16 AM, Johannes Berg wrote: >>>>> As for a name, I thought about it for a while and given that we have different >>>>>> "wireless" technologies -- bluetooth, NFC, naming this CONFIG_WIRELESS_EXPERT >>>>>> seemed odd, and given that our 802.11 framework is under cfg80211 naming it >>>>>> CONFIG_CFG80211_EXPERT seemed appropriate. But even if its under cfg80211 >>>>>> perhaps something more explicit about the implications may be better, how >>>>>> about CONFIG_CFG80211_MAY_BREAK_CERTIFICATION ? >>>> >>>> Or you could just be explicit about it and call it >>>> CONFIG_WIRELESS_REGULATORY_BREAKAGE or something like that :-) >>> >>> CONFIG_WIRELESS_CERTIFIED? >> >> That one looks familiar ;-) > > Sorry, did you suggest that already? I missed that. I guess I need to > start organising my email better :) We have CONFIG_ATH9K_DFS_CERTIFIED. I like something like CONFIG_CFG80211_MAY_BREAK_CERTIFICATION given that CONFIG_WIRELESS_CERTIFIED only assumes the kconfig options it would depend on are all neatly developed but they could be still under development. The only thing about CONFIG_CFG80211_MAY_BREAK_CERTIFICATION is I suspect not many folks would be willing to ship with that enabled at all even *after* they do their homework. So how about CONFIG_CFG80211_CERTIFICATION_ONUS which can be defined as an option for features / options whereby the onus for regulatory certification is being accepted by the option enabler? Pretty simple and to the point, and would allow for research code but also code whereby a bit more work is required on the enabler like DFS certification. Luis