On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 10:37:35AM +0000, Peer, Ilan wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Luis R. Rodriguez [mailto:mcgrof@xxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 23:23 > > To: Peer, Ilan > > Cc: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ArikX Nemtsov > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 2/3] cfg80211: Add API to change the indoor > > regulatory setting > > > > On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 01:02:28AM -0500, Ilan Peer wrote: > > > diff --git a/net/wireless/reg.c b/net/wireless/reg.c index > > > c24c8bf..f88d512 100644 > > > --- a/net/wireless/reg.c > > > +++ b/net/wireless/reg.c > > > @@ -128,9 +128,12 @@ static int reg_num_devs_support_basehint; > > > * State variable indicating if the platform on which the devices > > > * are attached is operating in an indoor environment. The state variable > > > * is relevant for all registered devices. > > > - * (protected by RTNL) > > > */ > > > static bool reg_is_indoor; > > > +static spinlock_t reg_indoor_lock; > > > + > > > +/* Used to track the userspace process controlling the indoor setting > > > +*/ static u32 reg_is_indoor_portid; > > > > > > static const struct ieee80211_regdomain *get_cfg80211_regdom(void) { > > > @@ -2288,15 +2291,52 @@ int regulatory_hint_user(const char *alpha2, > > > return 0; > > > } > > > > > > -int regulatory_hint_indoor_user(void) > > > +int regulatory_hint_indoor(bool is_indoor, u32 portid) > > > { > > > + spin_lock(®_indoor_lock); > > > + > > > + /* Other user space processes cannot override the current owner */ > > > + if (reg_is_indoor_portid && reg_is_indoor_portid != portid) { > > > + spin_unlock(®_indoor_lock); > > > + return -EPERM; > > > + } > > > > I am not satisfied with this solution to conflict. I don't want to think about the > > solution to this for you -- please address the conflicts with sensible solutions. > > > > We could always allow the any user space process to set indoor=0, i.e., > indoor=1 is allowed iff all user space process agree on it. That makes sense if for indoor we tend to have a more liberal regulatory settings. Do we know this for sure? That is, are we more restrictive outdoors? Does that vary by country? > > > + > > > + if (reg_is_indoor == is_indoor) { > > > + spin_unlock(®_indoor_lock); > > > + return 0; > > > + } > > > > For instance this is a solution to agreement, but yet the above only allows for > > one wiphy to set this setting and limiting the wireless core. That's rather silly. > > We've addressed bigger conflicts than this for regulatory -- I have confidence > > you can address this well. > > This should not really be wiphy specific. Sorry I meant supplicant specific. 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
