Return-path: Received: from mail-bk0-f41.google.com ([209.85.214.41]:54270 "EHLO mail-bk0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751707Ab3KDQGd (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Nov 2013 11:06:33 -0500 Received: by mail-bk0-f41.google.com with SMTP id na10so3092047bkb.28 for ; Mon, 04 Nov 2013 08:06:31 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <5277C604.1050604@gmail.com> (sfid-20131104_170637_030148_43C1B395) Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 17:06:28 +0100 From: Xose Vazquez Perez MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Larry Finger , linux-wireless , Christian Lamparter , alexandre.f.demers@gmail.com, linville@tuxdriver.com Subject: Re: r92su: status and will it be merged anytime soon? References: <5277AC85.5050104@gmail.com> <5277BE84.7020808@lwfinger.net> In-Reply-To: <5277BE84.7020808@lwfinger.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11/04/2013 04:34 PM, Larry Finger wrote: >> _anything_ is better than a staging driver. >> >> There are distributions that don't build staging drivers. > > As a result, they force their users to build out-of-tree drivers! reformulating: As a result, they force their users to _have a stable kernel_ Staging is only a working area. And the rtl8712-TODO is unreal: - merge Realtek's bugfixes and new features into the driver - switch to use LIB80211 - switch to use MAC80211 - checkpatch.pl fixes - only a few remain >> So, please, replace and delete staging/rtl8712 with r92su. > > You seem not to understand. Any new wireless driver that does not > use mac80211 *must* go into staging. AFAIK, that rule is absolute, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > and r92su cannot go into the regular wireless tree. Who said that ? Then replace staging/rtl8712 with staging/r92su Anyway, r92su is a _linux_ driver with a cfg80211 interface. staging/rtl8712 is crap? 1152k drivers/staging/rtl8712/ 340k r92su/ > If you do not like having drivers for RTL8192SU in staging, then > write one that uses mac80211. You have access to as much information > about the chips as anyone outside Realtek. They have no interest > in doing the mac80211 version, and I have many other tasks with > higher priority. Nobody said that you have to write a rtl8712-mac80211. But right now there is a better alternative, and it should be used.