On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 05:06:37PM +0200, Arik Nemtsov wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 05:02:19PM +0200, Arik Nemtsov wrote:
>> >> When the regulatory settings change, some channels might become invalid.
>> >> Disconnect interfaces acting on these channels, after giving userspace
>> >> code a grace period to leave them.
>> >>
>> >> This mode is currently opt-in, and not all interface operating modes are
>> >> supported for regulatory-enforcement checks. A wiphy that wishes to use
>> >> the new enforcement code must specify an appropriate regulatory flag,
>> >> and all its supported interface modes must be supported by the chekcing
>> >> code.
>> >
>> > This is all looking beter now, since I had a few requests for the last patch
>> > I'll ask for some other things here without asking to negage the flag purpose
>> > as I originally wanted.
>> >
>> >> Signed-off-by: Arik Nemtsov <arikx.nemtsov@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> ---
>> >> include/net/regulatory.h | 6 +++
>> >> net/wireless/core.c | 13 ++++++
>> >> net/wireless/reg.c | 106 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> >> 3 files changed, 124 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/include/net/regulatory.h b/include/net/regulatory.h
>> >> index dad7ab2..701177c 100644
>> >> --- a/include/net/regulatory.h
>> >> +++ b/include/net/regulatory.h
>> >> @@ -136,6 +136,11 @@ struct regulatory_request {
>> >> * otherwise initiating radiation is not allowed. This will enable the
>> >> * relaxations enabled under the CFG80211_REG_RELAX_NO_IR configuration
>> >> * option
>> >> + * @REGULATORY_ENFORCE_CHANNELS: the regulatory core will make sure all
>> >> + * interfaces on this wiphy reside on allowed channels. Upon a regdomain
>> >> + * change, the interfaces are given a grace period to disconnect or move
>> >> + * to an allowed channels. Interfaces on forbidden channels are forcibly
>> >> + * disconnected.
>> >
>> > Please rename to REGULATORY_IGNORE_STALE_KICKOFF, also please add
>> > some information about the amount current of grace period used,
>> > and types of interfaces supported. Since this is a regulatory flag
>> > this information will help folks decide whether to enable or not.
>> > Also encourage its use, and mention that once all supported devices
>> > get support for this will be enabled by default. In the meantime
>> > I'd prefer if this feature was enabled by default if the supported
>> > interface types of a dveice match the white list of supported
>> > interfaces.
>>
>> btw, I think you meant REGULATORY_STALE_KICKOFF, since it's an opt-in flag.
>
> Indeed, the REGULATORY_IGNORE_STALE_KICKOFF would be the inversion, which
> is really a better way to deal with this but Johannes considered it more
> work. I'll leave it up to you but if the supported interfaces on a driver
> work with it we should enable this by default. This is why the inversion
> (REGULATORY_IGNORE_STALE_KICKOFF) would work better in the end, as we want
> to keep this on by default and only let folks opt out.
I thought we agreed this to be opt-in, even if all interfaces are
supported? I still think an untested driver might be hurt by this
patch. For instance if it requires a different grace period, etc.
Arik
--
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
