| Message ID | 1251820465-11104-1-git-send-email-lrodriguez@atheros.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 08:54:25AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > This updates the mac80211 kconfig entry to clarify > what it is and refer people to our wireless wiki for > more documentation. > diff --git a/net/mac80211/Kconfig b/net/mac80211/Kconfig > - tristate "Generic IEEE 802.11 Networking Stack (mac80211)" > + tristate "mac80211 - SoftMAC device support" Uh.. Do we really need to call this SoftMAC or well have that in the title? I prefer the current text or if you want to, just move the mac80211 into the beginning.. > + This option enables support for a framework used by IEEE-802.11 s/IEEE-802.11/IEEE 802.11/ > + SoftMAC devices. SoftMAC devices allow for a finer control of the Again, I don't really like the term "SoftMAC" here.. > + hardware, allowing for 802.11 frame management to be done in software > + for them, for both parsing and generation of 802.11 wireless frames. > + Most 802.11 devices today tend to be of this type. s/802.11/IEEE 802.11/g > + If you have new userspace utitlities which support nl80211 you do not s/utitlities/utilities/ > + need wireless-extensions to support a mac80211 device. s/wireless-extensions/wireless extensions/ > + When built as a module it will be called as mac80211, if not sure > + you should build this as a module. s/, if/. If/
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Jouni Malinen<j@w1.fi> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 08:54:25AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> This updates the mac80211 kconfig entry to clarify >> what it is and refer people to our wireless wiki for >> more documentation. > >> diff --git a/net/mac80211/Kconfig b/net/mac80211/Kconfig > >> -   tristate "Generic IEEE 802.11 Networking Stack (mac80211)" >> +   tristate "mac80211 - SoftMAC device support" > > Uh.. Do we really need to call this SoftMAC or well have that in the > title? I prefer the current text or if you want to, just move the > mac80211 into the beginning.. > > >> +    This option enables support for a framework used by IEEE-802.11 > > s/IEEE-802.11/IEEE 802.11/ > >> +    SoftMAC devices. SoftMAC devices allow for a finer control of the > > Again, I don't really like the term "SoftMAC" here.. > >> +    hardware, allowing for 802.11 frame management to be done in software >> +    for them, for both parsing and generation of 802.11 wireless frames. >> +    Most 802.11 devices today tend to be of this type. > > s/802.11/IEEE 802.11/g > >> +    If you have new userspace utitlities which support nl80211 you do not > > s/utitlities/utilities/ > >> +    need wireless-extensions to support a mac80211 device. > > s/wireless-extensions/wireless extensions/ > >> +    When built as a module it will be called as mac80211, if not sure >> +    you should build this as a module. > > s/, if/. If/ Also, s/called as/called/ > > -- > Jouni Malinen                       PGP id EFC895FA > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >
On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 09:33:00AM -0700, Jouni Malinen wrote: > On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 08:54:25AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > This updates the mac80211 kconfig entry to clarify > > what it is and refer people to our wireless wiki for > > more documentation. > > > diff --git a/net/mac80211/Kconfig b/net/mac80211/Kconfig > > > - tristate "Generic IEEE 802.11 Networking Stack (mac80211)" > > + tristate "mac80211 - SoftMAC device support" > > Uh.. Do we really need to call this SoftMAC or well have that in the > title? I was hoping this would clarify to users a little more on what this really was instead of referring it as a generic "IEEE 802.11 stack". For example, I'd expect a few users to be a bit puzzled why a cfg80211 driver did not make use of the "IEEE 802.11 stack". > I prefer the current text or if you want to, just move the > mac80211 into the beginning.. I am not sure if this would be clear to users, as cfg80211 grows driver support I think a clearer distinction would help. But then again that's just my thoughts on this. An alternative to accomplish what I want to do -- which is to educate users -- is to keep just change this as you suggest as: "mac80211 - IEEE 802.11 Networking Stack" but then also educate that a "IEEE 802.11 Networking Stack" is only required for certain types of devices. This still seems a bit confusing to me though. Would like your opinion on how to best educate users on this taxonomy. > > + This option enables support for a framework used by IEEE-802.11 > > s/IEEE-802.11/IEEE 802.11/ > > > + SoftMAC devices. SoftMAC devices allow for a finer control of the > > Again, I don't really like the term "SoftMAC" here.. What's a better term? > > + hardware, allowing for 802.11 frame management to be done in software > > + for them, for both parsing and generation of 802.11 wireless frames. > > + Most 802.11 devices today tend to be of this type. > > s/802.11/IEEE 802.11/g > > > + If you have new userspace utitlities which support nl80211 you do not > > s/utitlities/utilities/ > > > + need wireless-extensions to support a mac80211 device. > > s/wireless-extensions/wireless extensions/ > > > + When built as a module it will be called as mac80211, if not sure > > + you should build this as a module. > > s/, if/. If/ Thanks for the review, will fix the typos, and will re-send after further feedback on the taxonomy. Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 10:28:35AM -0700, Gábor Stefanik wrote: > On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez<lrodriguez@atheros.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 09:33:00AM -0700, Jouni Malinen wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 08:54:25AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > >> > + SoftMAC devices. SoftMAC devices allow for a finer control of the > >> > >> Again, I don't really like the term "SoftMAC" here.. > > > > What's a better term? > > > > "Software-based", "Software-MAC", "Software-defined", or anything that > neither implies that the stack is designed for PrismGT (the > capitalization "SoftMAC" comes from Intersil AFAIK), nor allows > confusion with ieee80211softmac (which could result if we write it > with all small letters as "softmac"). Indeed, I picked up 'SoftMAC' and 'FullMAC' terminology from the prism54 days after they decided to move in that direction as others were or already had. For better or for worse I have been using 'SoftMAC' throughout wireless.kernel.org documentation to distinguish between 'FullMAC' cards. I really have not been able to find any other suitable replacements, are there legal reasons to not use such terms? I thought 'mac80211' name was brilliant as it highlighted the main focus for the module, to focus on the MAC frame processing, I just cannot think of any description for it other than something to support SoftMAC cards. Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
2009/9/1 Luis R. Rodriguez <lrodriguez@atheros.com>: > On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 10:28:35AM -0700, Gábor Stefanik wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez<lrodriguez@atheros.com> wrote: >> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 09:33:00AM -0700, Jouni Malinen wrote: >> >> On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 08:54:25AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> >> > +    SoftMAC devices. SoftMAC devices allow for a finer control of the >> >> >> >> Again, I don't really like the term "SoftMAC" here.. >> > >> > What's a better term? >> > >> >> "Software-based", "Software-MAC", "Software-defined", or anything that >> neither implies that the stack is designed for PrismGT (the >> capitalization "SoftMAC" comes from Intersil AFAIK), nor allows >> confusion with ieee80211softmac (which could result if we write it >> with all small letters as "softmac"). > > Indeed, I picked up 'SoftMAC' and 'FullMAC' terminology from the prism54 days > after they decided to move in that direction as others were or already had. For > better or for worse I have been using 'SoftMAC' throughout wireless.kernel.org > documentation to distinguish between 'FullMAC' cards. I really have not been > able to find any other suitable replacements, are there legal reasons to not use > such terms? > > I thought 'mac80211' name was brilliant as it highlighted the main focus for the > module, to focus on the MAC frame processing, I just cannot think of any > description for it other than something to support SoftMAC cards. The description isn't the problem - the term "SoftMAC" is, due to its connections with ieee80211softmac. Even "Software MAC" would be better here. > >  Luis >
On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 10:47:43AM -0700, Gábor Stefanik wrote: > 2009/9/1 Luis R. Rodriguez <lrodriguez@atheros.com>: > > On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 10:28:35AM -0700, Gábor Stefanik wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez<lrodriguez@atheros.com> wrote: > >> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 09:33:00AM -0700, Jouni Malinen wrote: > >> >> On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 08:54:25AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > >> >> > + SoftMAC devices. SoftMAC devices allow for a finer control of the > >> >> > >> >> Again, I don't really like the term "SoftMAC" here.. > >> > > >> > What's a better term? > >> > > >> > >> "Software-based", "Software-MAC", "Software-defined", or anything that > >> neither implies that the stack is designed for PrismGT (the > >> capitalization "SoftMAC" comes from Intersil AFAIK), nor allows > >> confusion with ieee80211softmac (which could result if we write it > >> with all small letters as "softmac"). > > > > Indeed, I picked up 'SoftMAC' and 'FullMAC' terminology from the prism54 days > > after they decided to move in that direction as others were or already had. For > > better or for worse I have been using 'SoftMAC' throughout wireless.kernel.org > > documentation to distinguish between 'FullMAC' cards. I really have not been > > able to find any other suitable replacements, are there legal reasons to not use > > such terms? > > > > I thought 'mac80211' name was brilliant as it highlighted the main focus for the > > module, to focus on the MAC frame processing, I just cannot think of any > > description for it other than something to support SoftMAC cards. > > The description isn't the problem - the term "SoftMAC" is, due to its > connections with ieee80211softmac. Even "Software MAC" would be better > here. Software MAC sounds reasonable to me. Anyone else? Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 11:01:47AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 10:47:43AM -0700, Gábor Stefanik wrote: > > The description isn't the problem - the term "SoftMAC" is, due to its > > connections with ieee80211softmac. Even "Software MAC" would be better > > here. > > Software MAC sounds reasonable to me. Anyone else? Seems fine -- IMHO "soft MAC" would be fine as well...
On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 11:01 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> Software MAC sounds reasonable to me. Anyone else?
Except we're not actually talking about the MAC at all. The MAC is still
in the hardware.
johannes
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Johannes Berg<johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote: > On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 11:01 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > >> Software MAC sounds reasonable to me. Anyone else? > > Except we're not actually talking about the MAC at all. The MAC is still > in the hardware. How how about just: "mac80211 - IEEE 802.11 frame processing" Then as for referring to these type of devices I am not aware of other vocabulary for them other than SoftMAC or its derivative names. Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/net/mac80211/Kconfig b/net/mac80211/Kconfig index 9db4ff8..72006f9 100644 --- a/net/mac80211/Kconfig +++ b/net/mac80211/Kconfig @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ config MAC80211 - tristate "Generic IEEE 802.11 Networking Stack (mac80211)" + tristate "mac80211 - SoftMAC device support" depends on CFG80211 select CRYPTO select CRYPTO_ECB @@ -7,8 +7,21 @@ config MAC80211 select CRYPTO_AES select CRC32 ---help--- - This option enables the hardware independent IEEE 802.11 - networking stack. + This option enables support for a framework used by IEEE-802.11 + SoftMAC devices. SoftMAC devices allow for a finer control of the + hardware, allowing for 802.11 frame management to be done in software + for them, for both parsing and generation of 802.11 wireless frames. + Most 802.11 devices today tend to be of this type. + + If you have new userspace utitlities which support nl80211 you do not + need wireless-extensions to support a mac80211 device. + + For more information refer the the wireless wiki entry on mac80211: + + http://wireless.kernel.org/en/developers/Documentation/mac80211 + + When built as a module it will be called as mac80211, if not sure + you should build this as a module. comment "CFG80211 needs to be enabled for MAC80211" depends on CFG80211=n
This updates the mac80211 kconfig entry to clarify what it is and refer people to our wireless wiki for more documentation. Cc: Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi> Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <lrodriguez@atheros.com> --- Changed description of when built as a module as pointed out by Larry. net/mac80211/Kconfig | 19 ++++++++++++++++--- 1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)