Re: [PATCH 2/2][RFC] mac80211_hwsim: Report radio addresses in NEW_RADIO/GET_RADIO

[Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>]

On 02/27/2017 05:23 PM, Andrew Zaborowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 27 February 2017 at 18:10, Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> wrote:
>> On 02/27/2017 07:26 AM, Andrew Zaborowski wrote:
>>> As it turns out it can be read from /sys, but I do need it so I can
>>> know what to put in HWSIM_ATTR_ADDR_RECEIVER based on the destination
>>> addr in the frame or if I want to forward the frame to all radios.  Or
>>> is there another way to know that?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'd actually prefer to *only* have the wiphy index, and I don't really
>>>> see a problem with moving the wiphy_idx from struct
>>>> cfg80211_registered_device to struct wiphy.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ok, I'll try that.  get_wiphy_idx can stay in place, not sure if I
>>> should just drop it.
>>>
>>> By having *only* the wiphy index you don't mean dropping the radio
>>> names altogether?  The don't seem useful but userspace may expect
>>> them.
>>
>>
>> I find the name and addr more useful than an 'index', because if you
>> remove/add
>> a virtual phy, then the index will probably change, even if name and MAC
>
> I don't think you can remove/add a phy without removing the hwsim
> radio.  A hwsim radio is tied to some wiphy at all times.

You can specify the MAC address and name (ie, wiphy0) when creating a hwsim radio.
You cannot specify the index.  So, from a user-space perspective,
I think the name and MAC is more important than the index.

Anyway, I think you are correct to pay attention to the MAC address and use
that as the identifying key.

Thanks,
Ben


-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com