On Fri, 2023-02-24 at 15:38 +0530, Manikanta Pubbisetty wrote: > On 1/10/2023 10:35 PM, James Prestwood wrote: > > 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. > > > > Hi Johannes, > > What is your opinion on the changes being proposed to the 6 GHz scan in > cfg80211 that is being discussed in this thread? > I don't think we can/should change the semantics of an existing flag now, but we can certainly update the documentation to match the implementation, and add more flags to make it more flexible. johannes
