Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/39] i2400m: host-to-device protocol definitions

From: Inaky Perez-Gonzalez <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 18:06:53 -0800

On Thursday 27 November 2008, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 15:07 -0800, Inaky Perez-Gonzalez wrote:
> > +/* Message types */
> > +enum i2400m_mt {
> > +	I2400M_MT_RESERVED              = 0x0000,
> > +	I2400M_MT_INVALID               = 0xffff,
 > ...
> > +	I2400M_MT_REPORT_EAP_RESTART    = 0xe003,
> > +	I2400M_MT_REPORT_ALT_ACCEPT    	= 0xe004,
> > +	I2400M_MT_REPORT_KEY_REQUEST 	= 0xe005,
>
> Since this is all device-specific, this is like implementing all of
> 802.11 management with iwpriv. 

No it is not -- management is done at the device level; disconnect WiFi, 
because this is completely different.

> Do you really want that? Why wouldn't most of these commands port 
> over to other hardware? 

As explained on the first message, vendors might choose to break the
hw interface at a different level. We won't force vendors to use the
same interface as the Intel device does or make the same design 
decisions we made.

-- 
Inaky