On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 04:57:00PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: >> On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 13:43 +0100, Janusz Dziedzic wrote: >> > Introduce regulatory flags field, NL80211_REG_WIDE_BW >> > country flag and new attribute NL80211_ATTR_REG_FLAGS. >> > If NL80211_REG_WIDE_BW is set, check rules and calculate >> > maximum bandwidth base on all contiguous regulatory rules. >> > If unset get maximum badwitdh from regulatory rule. >> > This patch is backward compatible with current CRDA/db.txt >> > implementation. >> >> This seems reasonable, thanks. Maybe we should require the bandwidth to >> not be set at all or something? At least maybe in the regdb parser - it >> makes very little sense to have @20 and then ignore it completely? >> >> Or maybe the userspace code could just not expose the flag, but rather >> set the new "wide_bw" flag when all the rules are marked as @N/A (and >> treat a combination of @number and @N/A as a bug)? > > The optimizer code I added to CRDA does all this for us, so technically, > unless I'm missing something, this could be dealt with magically in > userspace. Its also unclear why we'd define this as a regulatory > parameter -- this just seems to make sense. > > I'd look at extending CRDA binary to use the optimizer on the regulatory > domain prior to sending it to the kernel. All of a sudden you get full > support for this for free on any kernel. And as for the users of the internal regdb -- have them use the optimizer to optimize their db prior to compiling the kernel ;) Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
