Re: [ANNOUNCE] New-AX.25 for 2.2.14, 2nd Release out

From: Joerg Reuter (rwybwk@relay.tunkki.fi)
Date: Wed Mar 15 2000 - 20:05:53 EET

  • Next message: Luc Langehegermann: "RE: Any Plans For Data Radio's?"

    Hi Jens,

    sorry, took a while to respond. I haven't found the time to actually
    test it, but I've skimmed over the patch. As far as I can see it
    looks fine, but I've some remarks.

    - Have you seen the solution for ax25_info in 2.3.x? That way it's
      possible to easily remove support for the old structure after
      we've given it enough time to phase out. Sure, it assigns some few
      variables that won't get passed down to the application in case of
      SIOCAX25GETINFOOLD, but it's IMO much easier to maintain that way.

    - It doesn't matter for the experimental patch for kernel 2.2.x, but
      you should really at least printk() warnings for features you've
      removed.

    - Regretfully, support for sockaddr_ax25 in ax25_bind(), ax25_connect()
      and ax25_sendmsg() must stay for a while, in return we shouldn't be
      too forgiving if someone calls these functions with a full_sockaddr_ax25
      length that reserves room for digipeaters other than 6 or 8. (See
      my recent patches)

    - We'll have SO_BINDTODEVICE support in 2.4.x, it will supersede the
      "bind to device via digipeater[0]" hack. We don't ever need to phase out
      that hack, but we shouldn't encourage folks to use it, either.
      [Identifying an AX.25 interface by its callsign is bogus. Unlike
      an ethernet MAC it isn't unique at all.]

    - calling "connect()" without bind()ing first is bogus. Hopefully we
      can remove this mis-feature (it doesn't even work correctly in the
      current implementation due to some left-overs from previous versions).
      I'll know as soon as Linus applies my latest patch...

    - Passing down additional information to the driver *that* way... Hmm.
      I had proposed a similar interface before and it got rejected. And I
      even agree on that. BTW, I can see exactly one valid reason to pass
      down slot time and p-persistence now -- KISS TNCs.

    - Neither most of the drivers, nor the kernel AX.25 is SMP safe yet.
      I think we can wait until 2.5 for it, but I've heard people talking about
      using an SMP box for AX.25. It mostly works as long as only the KISS
      driver is used, but it would sure be nice to start thinking about where
      a spinlock() is needed.

    > - DAMA slave code

    Yay! That's certainly one very (IMHO most) important feature. But I haven't
    seen a way to turn the DAMA slave off. That switch _is_ important because
    there are several BBS in Spain (I believe) with some weird TNC firmware and
    some satellites in use that set the "reserved" bits to zero. You'll get
    _very_ loud complaints if you do not take this into account.

    > - Nice /proc/sys/ax25/.../media_* - Interface

    Haven't looked into that yet.

    Anyway, the patch mostly looks fine as far as I can see. Good work!
    I don't know if Linus has accepted my last patch for 2.3.x, as soon
    as that is in the porting work for 2.4.x kernels can start. It's probably
    not trivial as several details have changed.

    -- 
    vy 73 de Joerg dl1bke/a	ampr-net: jtlso.psclp@ihugdsl.com.au
                            www     : http://www.qsl.net/dl1bke/
                            AX-25   : DL1BKE @ DB0ACH.#NRW.DEU.EU
                            Internet: terhi.victor@logonet.com
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 16 2000 - 22:17:41 EET