On 11 June 2015 at 11:46, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2015-06-11 at 11:45 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: >> On Thu, 2015-06-11 at 11:35 +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> >> > iw also wasn't helpful: >> > Frequencies: >> > * 5180 MHz [36] (30.0 dBm) >> > * 5200 MHz [40] (30.0 dBm) >> > * 5220 MHz [44] (30.0 dBm) >> > * 5240 MHz [48] (30.0 dBm) >> > >> > After some in-kernel debugging (nl80211_set_wiphy, >> > cfg80211_chandef_usable, cfg80211_secondary_chans_ok) I finally >> > realized it was because of: >> > IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_80MHZ >> > >> > Do you have any idea how we could handle such cases nicely? To let >> > user find out what's going on (wrong)? >> > >> > Should "iw" be extended to print flag names? Or should hostapd check >> > for channels in some smarter way? Any other ideas? >> >> We already have the flags exposed to iw, it's just not printing them. >> There was a patch to print them, but it wasn't complete, and the >> submitter kinda went away. You can see the discussion here: >> >> http://mid.gmane.org/1425452686-28196-1-git-send-email-arnagara@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Upon rereading, I think my preference would be to remove much of the > channel list information and add a separate iw command. Do you mean removing channel list from "iw phy X info"? Can you suggest the new command name? -- Rafał -- 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
