On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 04:09:51PM -0500, Larry Finger wrote: > John W. Linville wrote:
> > Is converting the softmac driver to mac80211 (as bcm43xx-old or > > somesuch) really a bigger job than trying to maintain out-of-tree > > code for both the driver and the softmac component from now on? > > Are you saying that two flavors of bcm43xx could be in-tree as long as both > use mac80211 and softmac > is discarded? I wasn't aware that this was a possibility. Of course, that > would be a lot less work > in the long run. There would be substantial work in the beginning, but very > little afterward. I don't see why not, especially if their IDs are such that they do not compete to control the same hardware. > > I'd much rather see two drivers, one for v3 firmware and one for > > later firmware. Why is this such a problem? Afterall, at one time > > the mac80211 (then d80211) driver supported v3 firmware. > > Based on Michael's comments, I think it would be easier to teach > bcm43xx-softmac to work with > mac80211 than it would be to put V3 firmware back in bcm43xx-mac80211. Do you > agree Michael? That makes sense to me. I appreciate that there is some up-front work, but as you acknowledge I think it is the most efficient choice in the long run. John -- John W. Linville [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Bcm43xx-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bcm43xx-dev
