Return-path: Received: from cpsmtpb-ews08.kpnxchange.com ([213.75.39.13]:1032 "EHLO cpsmtpb-ews08.kpnxchange.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755467Ab2ICBXv (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2012 21:23:51 -0400 Message-ID: <504406A2.7000303@gmail.com> (sfid-20120903_032417_129467_74B68891) Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2012 03:23:46 +0200 From: Gertjan van Wingerde MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ivo Van Doorn CC: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, "John W. Linville" , users@rt2x00.serialmonkey.com, Helmut Schaa Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] rt2x00: rt2800 - Make probe_hw function common between PCI and USB. References: <1346433734-3337-1-git-send-email-gwingerde@gmail.com> <1346433734-3337-2-git-send-email-gwingerde@gmail.com> <1346433734-3337-3-git-send-email-gwingerde@gmail.com> <1346433734-3337-4-git-send-email-gwingerde@gmail.com> <1346433734-3337-5-git-send-email-gwingerde@gmail.com> <1346433734-3337-6-git-send-email-gwingerde@gmail.com> <1346433734-3337-7-git-send-email-gwingerde@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 09/02/12 22:44, Ivo Van Doorn wrote: > Hi, > >> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c b/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c >> index c3cae1d..2ad3b7a 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c >> @@ -44,6 +44,13 @@ >> #include "rt2800.h" >> >> /* >> + * Allow hardware encryption to be disabled. >> + */ >> +static bool modparam_nohwcrypt = false; >> +module_param_named(nohwcrypt, modparam_nohwcrypt, bool, S_IRUGO); >> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nohwcrypt, "Disable hardware encryption."); > > I am not particularly fond of this change, I would like to have the > module parameters inside the actual drivers instead of inside one of > the > library modules. I don't know if there is a policy for modules which > says something about these situations, but my preference would be > that the module parameters are inside rt2800pci and rt2800usb, and > that the value would be passed to rt2800lib. > > If there is isn't a simple and clean way to do that, then we can take > this patch though... > Yeah, I wasn't a big fan of that part as well, but at the time couldn't find a better solution. I do have a better solution now, though. v3 of this patch will be posted soon. --- Gertjan