Hi Marcel, On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 11:54 AM Marcel Holtmann <[email protected]> wrote: > > Well, I guess we could just run the command and look for EOPNOTSUPP... > > this kind of API design and usage is bad. Try-and-error approach is just not > sustainable.
Sure. That "suggestion" was quite literally an afterthought. Not really a proper suggestion. > Even while it is late to add a proper flag that indicates support, we need to > do this to make nl80211 better for the future. I suppose. I'm not quite sure how I would make use of that properly though, given the corpus of kernels out there where the flag doesn't exist (but the feature does). Some other heurestic for determining kernel recency? Compile-time flags for the relevant user space, such that one builds it for "new kernel API (w/ flag)" vs. "old kernel API" (with the latter not even trying to look for the flag)? Or I guess a more proactive approach: implement both a "supported" and an "unsupported" flag, so user space can figure out a tristate: flag not available (old kernel -- user space is left to guess) vs. command supported flag vs. command not supported flag. That seems a bit awkward though. Brian
