On Tue, 2023-01-10 at 10:49 +0530, Manikanta Pubbisetty wrote: > On 12/29/2022 2:52 AM, James Prestwood wrote: > > Hi Manikanta, > > > By the way, userspace itself selects the frequencies to scan, not > > > the > > > driver. > > > > > > If we see the split scan implementation in cfg80211, this is the > > > how > > > it > > > is implemented. If NL80211_SCAN_FLAG_COLOCATED_6GHZ is set, it > > > selects > > > all PSC channels and those non-PSC channels where RNR IE > > > information > > > is > > > found in the legacy scan results. If this flag is not set, all > > > channels > > > in 6 GHz are included in the scan freq list. It is upto userspace > > > to > > > decide what it wants. > > > > > > This isn't your problem, but it needs to be said: > > > > The nl80211 docs need and update to reflect this behavior (or > > remove > > the PSC logic). IMO this is really weird that the kernel selects > > PSC's > > based on the co-located flag. The docs don't describe this behavior > > and > > the flag's name is misleading (its not > > SCAN_FLAG_COLOCATED_AND_PSC_6GHZ) :) > > > > Sorry for the late reply, I was on vacation. > > What you said make sense. The existing flag should not add PSC > channels > according to the flag description. > > We can add another flag something like you pointed out > SCAN_FLAG_COLOCATED_AND_PSC_6GHZ and include PSC channels if this > flag > is set. What do you say? I'm no authority here, just wanted to point this out. This is something that would need to be in mac80211 though, not just a specific driver. It would be up to the maintainers and would require changing the behavior of the existing flag, which then changes behavior in wpa_supplicant/hostapd. So its somewhat intrusive. But personally I'd be for it. And just require userspace include PSC's like any other channels if they need those. Thanks, James
