From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx51.mymxserver.com ([85.199.173.110]:19305 "EHLO mx51.mymxserver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756026Ab0C3K6X (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2010 06:58:23 -0400 From: Holger Schurig To: Daniel Mack Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/wireless/libertas: do not call wiphy_unregister() w/o wiphy_register() Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 12:59:23 +0200 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dan Williams , "John W. Linville" , Bing Zhao , libertas-dev@lists.infradead.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org References: <1269875658-3324-1-git-send-email-daniel@caiaq.de> <201003301149.13462.hs4233@mail.mn-solutions.de> <20100330105029.GO30801@buzzloop.caiaq.de> In-Reply-To: <20100330105029.GO30801@buzzloop.caiaq.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <201003301259.23973.hs4233@mail.mn-solutions.de> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > I don't get your point. The patch I submitted fixes an Ooops in the > driver, due to wrong handling of an API. What does that have to do with > principle discussions about the frameworks in use? I asked if there is a better method, and you said that you would test a better solution. That means that someone else should make a better solution. I just pointed out that I won't be the one who creates the better solution, because for fundamental reasons I don't see the libertas+cfg80211 approach going forward. That issue has nothing to do with you or your patch, so please don't feel offended or confused. Basically, I neither ack nor nak you patch. Given that it fixes an oops the patch should go in, and probably to stable at well. I just gave a hint, to make you think if you could come up with something better. BTW, testing/fixing of failure paths in libertas as well as simplifying the call sequence of functions during initialisation could be quite useful.