Good point, definitely makes sense. Would this be sufficient as an implementation for this RFC? Greetings Jonas > On 29. Aug 2022, at 16:52, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 2022-08-29 at 16:52 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: >> On Mon, 2022-08-29 at 16:51 +0200, Thomas Hühn wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Compile-Tested: current wireless-next tree with all flags on >>>>> Tested-on PCEngines APU with ath9k WiFi device on OpenWrt Linux >>>>> Kernel 5.10.137 >>>>> >>>> >>>> That seems just a little old? Not sure I'd trust that given the major >>>> changes in the tree recently? >>> >>> Good point, we can test this with 5.15.63 by enabling the OpenWrt testing kernel … would that be ok ? >>> >> >> Well a lot of major changes just happened 5.19 -> 6.0, so something more >> recent would be better? >> > > Maybe you could add support in hwsim? > > johannes
