Sorry for the late reply, this got lost in my inbox. In e.g. wpa_supplicant_need_to_roam_within_ess, we consider RSSI >= 0 to be "unspecified units (not in dBm)", and it's best to keep these all consistent IMO. If we should actually be treating >= 0 RSSI values as valid dBm values, then there should be a separate patch making all the relevant changes at once. For the purpose of this patch, that seems like an unnecessary (and potentially non-trivial) change in functionality that isn't mentioned in the commit message anyway. On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 1:31 AM Otcheretianski, Andrei <andrei.otcheretianski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > From: Matthew Wang <matthewmwang@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 06:52 > > To: Otcheretianski, Andrei <andrei.otcheretianski@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: hostap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Stern, Avraham <avraham.stern@xxxxxxxxx> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] driver_nl80211: report invalid signal and noise when > > info is unavailable > > > > In wpa_bss_update_level, we should probably continue to check for > > new_level < 0 as well as new_level > -WPA_INVALID_NOISE. > > Why? RSSI is in dbm's and 0 (and positive numbers) is a valid though unlikely value. > We even actually may get it in some conductive environments. > > Andrei > _______________________________________________ Hostap mailing list Hostap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/hostap
