On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 4:00 PM Matthew Wang <matthewmwang@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 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 To add to this: "unspecified" units come from something like NL80211_BSS_SIGNAL_MBM vs. NL80211_BSS_SIGNAL_UNSPEC, which apply to scan results. I don't think there's an equivalent UNSPEC possibility for the CQM / EVENT_SIGNAL_CHANGE events where wpa_bss_update_level() is used -- at least in this case, the signal values are coming from NL80211_STA_INFO_SIGNAL, which has documented units (dBm). But the below seems more compelling: > 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. +1, it doesn't seem like a necessary change to accomplish the goal of this patch. Brian _______________________________________________ Hostap mailing list Hostap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/hostap
