On 2/12/2025 6:05 PM, Pradeep Kumar Chitrapu wrote:
On 1/23/2025 3:35 AM, Maxime Bizon wrote:
On Wed, 2024-05-08 at 10:36 -0700, Pradeep Kumar Chitrapu wrote:
Hello,
This patch has been merged, but there may be a bug here:
+ if (sta->deflink.bandwidth == IEEE80211_STA_RX_BW_40)
+ arg->bw_40 = true;
+
+ if (sta->deflink.bandwidth == IEEE80211_STA_RX_BW_80)
+ arg->bw_80 = true;
+
+ if (sta->deflink.bandwidth == IEEE80211_STA_RX_BW_160)
+ arg->bw_160 = true;
+
+ if (sta->deflink.bandwidth == IEEE80211_STA_RX_BW_320)
+ arg->bw_320 = true;
+
Downstream driver does this instead:
if (sta->deflink.bandwidth >= IEEE80211_STA_RX_BW_40)
arg->bw_40 = true
[...]
So for a 320Mhz STA, bw_40/80/160/320 are set, resulting in multiple
bits WMI_PEER_xxxMHZ set the associated WMI command.
Which one is correct ?
(This is for EHT, but the same applies for VHT/HE code)
Hi Maxime,
I noticed that currently only one of the bandwidth flags is set in the
driver. I am inquiring with the firmware team to determine if we need to
set multiple flags from the driver. I will update you soon and, if
required, will post the next revision.
Thanks
Pradeep
Hi Maxime,
Currently, the firmware sets all lower bandwidth flags based on the
highest bandwidth set. While there is no harm in setting all bandwidth
flags, this may not be mandatory. Please let me know your thoughts.
Thanks,
Pradeep
