Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <3ac3c91120a128f66ca3806294f6a783e0f1131f.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/76] wifi: more MLO work
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To:     Arend Van Spriel <aspriel@gmail.com>,
        linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, kvalo@kernel.org,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org
Date:   Thu, 14 Jul 2022 10:30:19 +0200
In-Reply-To: <e9ecb9c8-cb5b-d727-38d6-ef5a0bf81cef@gmail.com>
References: <20220713094502.163926-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net>
         <e9ecb9c8-cb5b-d727-38d6-ef5a0bf81cef@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.3 (3.44.3-1.fc36) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 2022-07-14 at 10:26 +0200, Arend Van Spriel wrote:
>=20
> Just for my own patch submit process. What is the reason I am seeing the=
=20
> "wifi:" prefix being used with patches on linux-wireless list? Is there=
=20
> other wireless tech used, eg. "bt:" or so?
>=20

Well, we had a discussion with Jakub, and he kind of indicated that he'd
like to see a bit more generic prefixes to clarify things.

We've kind of been early adopters to try it out and see what it looks
like, he hasn't pushed it and wanted to have a discussion (e.g. at LPC
or netdevconf) about it first, but it kind of makes sense since not
everyone can know all the different drivers and components.

johannes