On 2/27/2023 9:53 AM, Manikanta Pubbisetty wrote:
On 2/24/2023 3:45 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
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
Sure, makes sense. I'll make the changes and send them out for review.
Sent out a patch to update the documentation for review.
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/20230308104556.9399-1-quic_mpubbise@xxxxxxxxxxx/
Thanks,
Manikanta
