On Thu, 2002-10-24 at 16:53, Solomon Peachy wrote:
> Out of curiousity, how far back to you trust the code? 2.2? 2.0? I only
> ask because a lot of the driver work I do is for underpowered
> embedded targets running relatively ancient 2.0 kernels.
I trust it back to 2.2, Im not sure about 2.0 but its probably ok.
> > > 2) write an 802.11 equivalent of the code in eth.c
> > That may be much cleaner and easier to get right. Its also easier to
> > maintain
>
> That's what I've been planning to do all along. It will be nice not
> having to convert 802.3<-->802.11 in every wireless driver.. plus the
> added benefit of not having to realloc/memcpy buffers to work around
> dumb DMA engines that require contiguious buffers..
Remember that you want to land IP frame headers on a 4 byte boundary if
possible. Thats sometimes a conflicting constraint alas
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 22:00:23 EST