On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 10:47 +0100, Janusz Dziedzic wrote:
> On 21 February 2014 09:52, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 19:54 +0100, Janusz Dziedzic wrote:
> >
> >> +++ b/include/net/regulatory.h
> >> @@ -155,6 +155,7 @@ struct ieee80211_reg_rule {
> >> struct ieee80211_freq_range freq_range;
> >> struct ieee80211_power_rule power_rule;
> >> u32 flags;
> >> + u32 dfs_cac_ms;
> >> };
> >
> > Does that really have to be per channel? That's a significant investment
> > into bss size since we have a lot of channel structs.
> >
> This seems easiest way to handle ETSI VHT80/40 case for channels with
> different CAC time (eg):
> VHT80:
> - 116 (60s)
> - 120 (600s)
> - 124 (600s)
> - 128 (600s)
>
> VHT40/HT40:
> - 132 (600s)
> - 136 (60s)
Huh, but you don't distinguish between channel widths in this whole
patchset?
johannes
--
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
