On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 10:57:00AM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 18:47 +0100, Simon Wunderlich wrote: > > > > > What I've tried: > > > > * configure 2 SSIDs in hostapd, start it > > > > * both wlan0 and wlan0-1 got created > > > > * only wlan0 comes up, wlan0-1 was rejected because of missing channel combinations > > > > * now I've injected a radar - which should be sent to wlan0 and wlan0-1 > > > > * wlan0 could send the event, but wlan0-1 had no bss configured and therefore no chandef > > > > > > > > I can change this comment to "may happen to devices which have currently no BSS configured", > > > > maybe that it is not so confusing ... > > > > > > Not sure I understand, how would the radar detected event come to an > > > interface that doesn't really exist for the driver? > > > > wlan0-1 exists and was created, but no AP was ever started - because hostapd tried > > to start the AP on a DFS channel when wlan0 was already active, and thanks to our > > interface combinations this is not allowed. Therefore, the vif.bss_conf.chandef is empty. > > > > The interface does exist for the driver (interface add succeeded), but start_ap failed, > > so it is a virgin AP interface. > > > > I think this behaviour is correct like that ... > > So ... starting the AP failed because it was a different channel, it was > added to the driver because multiple AP interfaces were allowed but the > specific channel wasn't allowed (in addition) when it was started? But I > still don't see why that interface should get an event since it doesn't > even have a channel yet, except maybe preset_chan which is really only > for backward compatibility reasons? > > What am I missing? Where does the event on wlan0-1 come from anyway? In the (dummy) ath9k part I'm handling the radar by simply sending radar events to all ieee80211_vifs which are registered on this phy - regardless their status, if they are up or not. That's why both wlan0 and wlan0-1 get the event in my example. Of course, sending the event to wlan0-1 is pretty useless in my case, but we should better check. :) Cheers, Simon >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
