On Tue, 2019-01-22 at 17:00 +0530, vamsin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > It seems that this should be with the existing > > > > NL80211_SCHED_SCAN_MATCH_ATTR_RSSI, not in this level namespace. > > > > > > The band specific rssi thresholds that are being configured are global > > > across all matchsets whereas NL80211_SCHED_SCAN_MATCH_ATTR_* > > > attributes > > > are mostly specific to each matchset. Hence I choose to define > > > attributes in higher level namespace. In future, whenever we want to > > > adding support for rssi thresholds per band and per matchset, we can > > > define attributes within NL80211_SCHED_SCAN_MATCH_ATTR_* namespace > > > level. > > > > But why do we want global ones now? > > > > The global thresholds were there earlier as well. Earlier, we were using > a matchset with only rssi attribute without any ssid/bssid attribute > within the matchset. I thought having global attributes for specifying > global thresholds is better way going forward and avoids unnecessary > confusion. Mostly, same thresholds will be used for all ssids/bssids in > general rather than thresholds specific to ssid/bssid. However, I > couldn't see any disadvantage of using global attributes for this case, > please let me know if you see any disadvantage/concern with this. I just think it's more complex code, overall. To me we now have sort of a fork in the road global RSSI ---> per-matchset RSSI \ \--> global band-specific RSSI so it seems somebody will want to introduce per-matchset band-specific RSSI eventually, and that just makes it even more complex? What's the downside of going to per-matchset band-specific RSSI? johannes