> -----Original Message----- > From: Johannes Berg [mailto:johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > > So you see a use-case for doing a scan with @relative_rssi being > > > zero, right? > > > > Yes. Zero value for relative_rssi is also valid. > > Or negative even, I guess? Yes, this can be negative also. > > I like to leave this as s8 only. This will leave more flexibility to > > userspace especially in case of more than two bands in future. > > I guess you should reword that - instead of "better" it should say how this value > is applied, as a delta to the current RSSI, and then reporting the result. > > However, I don't understand your comment about this being related to multiple > bands, can you clarify? The relative_rssi just determines the filter after the > adjustment(s) done with rssi_adjust, but how could it be relevant? > > The only use case for relative_rssi being negative would be when you actually > *want* to see slightly worse networks than the one you're connected to, e.g. to > determine if you should use them because they have better parameters (e.g. > HT/VHT or soon HE). I would like to swallow my words. There is something wrong with my earlier thinking. > > > > @relative_rssi is valid only when @relative_rssi_set is set to true > > and @rssi_adjust is valid only when @relative_rssi is valid. I think > > that is understandable to drivers and there is no need of explicit > > check here. > > It wouldn't be problematic to parse the RSSI_ADJUST only when the others are > present though, so that a driver could apply the rssi_adjust unconditionally > (since, if it's not parsed, the delta will be 0.) Sure, will take care of this in the next patch. Thanks, Vamsi
