On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 06:32:05PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Sat, 2013-02-02 at 23:15 +0100, Simon Wunderlich wrote: > > 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: > > > > > That sounds strange -- how does ath9k even know about an interface > that's not UP? Maybe you mean it didn't start an AP? Yeah, that is what I meant - the AP wasn't started on this on that interface. > > Why does the driver even report it by interface? It seems it should do > it on a channel context, or even on the hw since it can only be a single > channel in that case anyway? Well, yeah the reporting is currently done per interface. Reporting radars for the hw is certainly possible as well - channel contexts are currently not implemented in ath9k (where I test). The latest patchset works the same way, although we can change that if you prefer. For the current implementation (single channel, single vif) it makes no difference, maybe for future implementations. I don't know if there are any weird corner cases though, and we probably need to adjust the mac80211 interface too when to report radars on certain channels only (e.g. extension channel radar). Cheers, Simon
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
