Subject: Re: Broadcom 43xx first results

From: Jeff Garzik <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 14:08:28 -0500

Jiri Benc wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 13:38:37 -0500, Joseph Jezak wrote:
> 
>>We're not writing an entire stack.  We're writing a layer that sits in 
>>between the current ieee80211 stack that's already present in the kernel 
>>and drivers that do not have a hardware MAC.  Since ieee80211 is already 
>>in use in the kernel today, this seemed like a natural and useful 
>>extension to the existing code.  I agree that it's somewhat wasteful to 
>>keep rewriting 802.11 stacks and we considered other options, but it 
>>seemed like a more logical choice to work with what was available and 
>>recommended than to use an external stack.
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, the only long-term solution is to rewrite completely the
> current in-kernel ieee80211 code (I would not call it a "stack") or
> replace it with something another. The current code was written for
> Intel devices and it doesn't support anything else - so every developer

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.

> 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?

> 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.

	Jeff