On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 11:18:30PM +0200, Joerg Mayer wrote: > On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 08:40:59PM +0200, Jiri Benc wrote: > > d80211 (aka DeviceScape stack) isn't stable yet. There are known locking > > problems (see f.e. http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg13279.html), > > d80211 is known not to work with NetworkManager yet, user space tools > > for advanced features of d80211 need to be written. > > > > We definitely won't have all of this fixed in time for 2.6.18. > > Do you really mean 2.6.18 or 2.6.19? And while neither NM nor advanced > features may be ready in time for the 10.2 release, even the basic > functionality will quite likely be very welcome when compared to shipping > a 10.2 without any support for these cards. > > > > Some driver developers therefore perfer to use the DeviceScape stack. > > > > There is a general consensus that new wireless drivers should use > > d80211. > > ... unless the card has very much intelligence inside: it doesn't look > like the current ipw2100 and ipw2200 can be ported with a reasonable > amount of work to the devicescape stack - the ipw3945 has already been > ported by Intel (still waiting for the release). > > > > Other drivers (like madwifi) even use their > > > own stack implementation. The inhomogeneity of the wireless LAN drivers > > > is a major drawback for us, but unfortunately it does not look like it > > > will get better until we have a full featured ieee80211 stack in the > > > mainline kernel every WLAN driver developer can live with. > > I've been following the developemnt of the wireless stack for quite a > while now, and wihle it looked like the (Intel based) current ieee stack > would be the base for a future unified wireless stack, things have > changed significantly and chances are really high that d80211 will be > the future - there has even been the discussion on netdev to make the > switch as early as 2.6.19 (that's why I wrote "might ... one release > early"). > > So even if it isn't quite ready for prime time now, it looks like it is > very close - and if it makes it into a 2.6.19rcX while 10.2 is still in > beta, I'd like to see a backport going into the suse 10.2 kernel - > that's what I was really aiming at.
I doubt we will do any backports. Just the plain release kernel + necessary patches. Ciao, Marcus --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
