On Sun, Nov 19, 2006 at 05:34:49PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Sun, 2006-11-19 at 07:56 -0800, David Kimdon wrote: > > > What is wrong with the driver setting the function pointer to NULL for > > the cards that do not support scanning? Where does this requirment > > come from that the function pointers in struct ieee80211_wiphy be > > identical for all cards? > > Well I want to allow drivers to make assign the 33 function pointers in > a static structure, and differences between cards must then be handled > in the non-static part.
ok. I am concerned that making this split between per driver and per card is difficult to get right. Setting or not setting a function pointer for an operation is fairly standard practice and I don't see the value in introducing yet another way to indicate support. -David - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
