On Sun, 2007-01-28 at 22:28 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:

On Sat, 2007-01-27 at 07:08 -0500, Dan Williams wrote:

quoted

I really, really don't know why ieee80211 uses <hidden>, but it's a pain
in the ass and should NOT be done for d80211.  I don't know if we can
ever remove it from ieee80211 though for backwards compat reasons.

Ugh. /me makes a note for the cfg80211/we compat layer. This is a
mess :(

Well, there's no way a userspace program could depend on all hidden SSID
APs having the <hidden> tag, since if you stick in another,
non-ieee80211-stack card it won't be like that.  So I don't think we
should care about <hidden> in d80211, but I don't think we can remove it
from ieee80211 either.  The only case where we'll care about it is if we
move to common scan-result processing code, and there we may have to put
a compat flag in that the driver can set or something.  But we should
definitely _not_ use <hidden> in d80211 or cfg80211, because any program
depending on <hidden> just won't work with anything other than an ipw
card.

Dan