On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 14:33 +0200, Jouni Malinen wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 07:18:43AM -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
>
> > With WEXT, there are three ways to calculate pretty bars. They *all*
> > require max_qual values returned from the GIWRANGE handler, because
> > otherwise you have no f**king clue what the upper or lower bounds are.
>
> > QUAL.LEVEL in dBm
> > --------------
> >
> > Requires:
> > - max_qual.level == 0 (ie, dBm values)
>
> That is an area where NM (= 0) and mac80211 (= -110) do not agree.
Then mac80211 is not conforming to WEXT... unless it's setting
IW_QUAL_DBM in the updated field, which it probably is.
Before we added IW_QUAL_DBM, the switch between dBm and RSSI was
max_qual.level; if it was 0, level was in dBm, because no cards in use
in Linux at that time could support a signal of more 0 dBm. Thus, if it
was over 0, the value was in RSSI.
Here's the relevant bit of wireless.h:
/* Quality range (link, level, noise)
* If the quality is absolute, it will be in the range [0 ; max_qual],
* if the quality is dBm, it will be in the range [max_qual ; 0].
That doc never got updated for IW_QUAL_DBM either.
> > NM is probably fine here with qual == 0 because I doubt the GIWRANGE
> > handler is returning a valid max_qual.qual > 0 anymore with Johannes'
> > patch. Could be wrong though.
>
> Well, it is not fine, but not only for that reason.. max_qual.qual is
> still set to 100 and the IW_QUAL_QUAL_INVALID is not used for it.
> However, even if I set IW_QUAL_QUAL_INVALID and remove "quality" from
> wpa_supplicant dbus interface, I still get NM showing perfect 100%
> signal all the time regardless of how close to losing the connection the
> card really is..
>
> I gave up on trying to understand all the cases, but my assumption is
> that the remaining issue is in the disagreement on max_qua.level for the
> dBm case. However, I'm not sure whether fixing that would automatically
> resolve the issues with wext (it might be enough for the current nl80211
> version with wpa_supplicant from git head).
NM doesn't really handle IW_QUAL_DBM (added in WE-19). Mainly because
stuff worked without it, and it wasn't implemented in drivers until
quite recently. NM should handle IW_QUAL_DBM.
> > Ah right; the dbus interface shouldn't be appending "quality" to the
> > dict if the driver doesn't provide valid quality (ie, max_qual.updated
> > has the QUAL_INVALID bit set). Same thing for noise and level.
>
> The unknown values are not included anymore in wpa_supplicant 0.7.x.
Just pulled; it doesn't show up in master. Do you have a separate git
repo for 0.7.x?
Dan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
