On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 12:24:17PM +0200, Janusz Dziedzic wrote: > On 11 June 2014 10:49, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:03 PM, Janusz Dziedzic > > <janusz.dziedzic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 11 June 2014 00:09, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Janusz Dziedzic > >>> <janusz.dziedzic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> Remove strange parsers. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Janusz Dziedzic <janusz.dziedzic@xxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> Did you test this with the different types of accepted rules? > >>> > >> > >> Tested with current db.txt (+AUTO-BW in some cases). > > > > I was curious more about the different use cases of the output power, > > sometimes we use dBm, sometimes mW I think. I think I tried your > > approach and ended up getting inconsistent results for the different > > cases, so that's why all the parser junk got added. If you found a way > > to successfully get rid of it though that's awesome, just want to be > > sure we tested all cases. I purposely tried to upkeep the output to > > match the input preference, some folks are picky about mW and others > > like dB, this helps with regulatory rules as they vary depending on > > the country and the country typically uses one or the other for the > > definitions. > > > > As a required I assume: > "\t(%f - %f @ %f), (%f mW)" or > "\t(%f - %f @ %f), (%f)" > Rest are optional. > > This is the code for eirp: > > /* Next get eirp */ > strsep(&line_p, ","); > if (!line_p) { > fprintf(stderr, "not found eirp in line: %s\n", line); > return -EINVAL; > } > > if (strstr(line_p, "mW")) { > hits = sscanf(line_p, " (%f mW)", &max_eirp); > if (hits != 1) > return -EINVAL; > reg_rule->power_rule.max_eirp = > REGLIB_MW_TO_MBM(max_eirp); > } else { > hits = sscanf(line_p, " (%f)", &max_eirp); > if (hits != 1) > return -EINVAL; > reg_rule->power_rule.max_eirp = > REGLIB_DBM_TO_MBM(max_eirp); > } > > > I see DE have mW (input and db2rd output): > > db.txt input > country DE: DFS-ETSI > # entries 279004 and 280006 > (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW) > # entry 303005, 304002 and 305002 > (5150 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR > # entries 308002, 309001 and 310003 > (5470 - 5725 @ 80), (500 mW), DFS > # 60 gHz band channels 1-4, ref: Etsi En 302 567 > (57240 - 65880 @ 2160), (40), NO-OUTDOOR > > db2rd < db.txt output > country DE: DFS-ETSI > (2400.000 - 2483.500 @ 40.000), (20.00) > (5150.000 - 5350.000 @ 80.000), (20.00), NO-OUTDOOR > (5470.000 - 5725.000 @ 80.000), (26.98), DFS > (57240.000 - 65880.000 @ 2160.000), (40.00), NO-OUTDOOR > > Do you remember some cases where this couldn't work? I checked and it seems fine, I thikn I failed to just if and else for a secondary check, looks good to me, can you resend and also address any discrepancies on CRDA git tree with what should be there since I did merge the AUTO patches already, if those need reverting please specify, otherwise we'll need the parser to also support that. 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