On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 14:08:28 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Patently false. > > ieee80211 is used by Intel. Some bits used by HostAP, which also > duplicates a lot of ieee80211 code. And bcm43xx. And another couple > drivers found in -mm or out-of-tree.
Hostap uses only encryption code, which was copied from - guess who - hostap. Everything other must be done by the hostap driver itself. bcm43xx can use - like every other driver - only constants and defines from ieee80211.h. This is the reason why they are trying to implement "softmac" on top of it. But that work was already done by Jouni. > > of a wifi driver tries to implement his own "softmac" now. I cannot see > > how this can move as forward and I think we can agree this is not the > > way to go. > > You're agreeing with only yourself, then? I meant that every driver tries to implements its own "softmac". This is not the way to go, right? > > Rewriting (or, if you like, enhancing) the current 802.11 code seems to > > be wasting of time now, when nearly complete Linux stack was opensourced > > by Devicescape. We can try to merge it, but I'm not convinced it is > > possible, the Devicescape's stack is far more advanced. > > This invalid logic is why we have a ton of wireless stacks, all > duplicating each other. Heh? We have one nearly finished stack (and no, it's not the one in kernel). Why should we try to implement a new stack instead of fixing some issues of the nearly finished one? -- Jiri Benc SUSE Labs - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
