Return-path: Received: from wolverine02.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.251]:39562 "EHLO wolverine02.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754130Ab2FOIWF (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2012 04:22:05 -0400 Message-ID: <4FDAF096.200@qca.qualcomm.com> (sfid-20120615_102210_406026_BE06656B) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 11:21:42 +0300 From: Kalle Valo MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Johannes Berg CC: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Arend van Spriel , , , Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] wireless: add CONFIG_CFG80211_EXPERT 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> In-Reply-To: <1339748211.4512.6.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 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? Kalle