On 21 February 2014 10:55, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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?
>
In patch cfg80211: DFS get CAC time from regulatory I check whole
chandef and get max channel cac value.
BR
Janusz
--
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
