> On Thu, 2014-07-24 at 12:39 +0200, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote:
>
>> @@ -2242,10 +2243,15 @@ static int nl80211_set_wiphy(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info)
>> changed |= WIPHY_PARAM_COVERAGE_CLASS;
>> }
>>
>> + if (info->attrs[NL80211_ATTR_WIPHY_DYNACK]) {
>> + coverage_class = -1;
>> + changed |= WIPHY_PARAM_COVERAGE_CLASS;
>> + }
>
> I think you should also reject having both dyn and fixed attributes.
>
Currently iw does not allow to set both attribute at the same time,
but I can use "if-else if" statement in order to exclude that
condition.
> You should also have a feature flag that drivers set that you test here
> and refuse dynamic if it's not supported, I guess?
>
I would rely on lower drivers to fail (returning -EOPNOTSUPP to
set_coverage_class caller) if dynack it is not supported and user is
trying to enable it. Does it sound good for you?
> johannes
>
Lorenzo
--
UNIX is Sexy: who | grep -i blonde | talk; cd ~; wine; talk; touch;
unzip; touch; strip; gasp; finger; gasp; mount; fsck; more; yes; gasp;
umount; make clean; sleep
--
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
