Hello Andreas,

On Mon, 17 Dec 2018 at 15:19, Andreas Färber [off-list ref] wrote:

Hello Xue Liu,

Am 17.12.18 um 09:50 schrieb Xue Liu:

quoted

I have a question about the architecture of your module. AFAIK LoRaWAN
is already the MAC Layer above the LoRa technology. Why do you want to
make a new layer called "maclorawan" ?

I had asked Jian-Hong to separate between his soft-MAC implementation
and the common bits needed to drive hard-MAC implementations found on
several of the hardware modules made available to me.

As a reference Linux 802.11 uses cfg80211 to talk with hard-MAC devices.
We may also use the name “cfglora” for hard-MAC implementation.

The prefix "mac" was copied from mac80211 and mac802154:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/net

OK. Understood. I guess they use mac80211 and mac802154 to distinguish
physical layer and MAC layer. Since LoRa and LoRaWAN are already
separate I think
"maclorawan" is not necessary.

If you have better ideas for how to structure this, just let us know,
ideally as inline comment where you see it (or on the cover letter).

Only comment I have for this patch at the moment is that I would prefer
to have the Kconfig bits be in the patches adding the code, so that we
can actually build-test them before 6/6.

Been updating my lab to 4.20-rcX with some hiccups. Ben's
regmap_noinc_write support made it into 4.20, so I expect to have Ben's
pending branch for sx1301 merged into rebased lora-next before Christmas
and my sx1276 conversion to follow, leaving the PF_PACKET vs. PF_LORA
discussion from ELCE - haven't assessed yet how much this series would
be affected by the underlying changes, but if the abstraction was done
right then only maclorawan implementation should be affected.

Regards,
Andreas

--
SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)

Regards,

Xue Liu


--