On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Monday, October 03, 2011 09:31:12 PM Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Christian Lamparter >> <chunkeey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Monday, October 03, 2011 08:27:39 PM Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> >> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 3:29 AM, Zefir Kurtisi <zefir.kurtisi@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Zefir Kurtisi <zefir.kurtisi@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> > --- >> >> > drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c | 12 ++++++++++++ >> >> > 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> > >> >> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c >> >> > index e8aeb98..5defebe 100644 >> >> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c >> >> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c >> >> > @@ -344,6 +344,18 @@ static int ath_reset_internal(struct ath_softc *sc, struct ath9k_channel *hchan, >> >> > "Unable to reset channel, reset status %d\n", r); >> >> > goto out; >> >> > } >> >> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ATH9K_DFS >> >> >> >> Please spare the #ifdef and just call something within dfs.c, then >> >> dfs.h would wrap it to nothing if DFS is disabled. >> > Why would anyone want to disable DFS driver support? >> > I would say: drop the ifdefs altogether since DFS >> > is and will be "required". >> >> Because DFS requires to be properly tested before being enabled. > Testing if a driver detects a pulse is "trivial" compared to the > stuff mac80211/cfg80211 and hostapd will have to do to make a > channel-change as smooth as possible. I think if there's a DFS > "OFF" switch, it should be in hostapd and I hope more people > agree on this one. You do have a good point, but I disagree that you do not need to test / regress test hardware / driver code for DFS. This is what I'm talking about. But yes, userspace also submits itself to the same criteria. >> You may also want to simply disable DFS if you do not want to >> deal with the regulatory test implications of having it enabled. > AFAIK you can't "simply" disable the DFS requirement: hostapd > (hw_features.c), [cfg80211] (checks if tx on secondary channel > is possible) and mac80211 (tx.c) all have checks. Indeed, the > easiest way is to modify crda's database. So there's no need > for an extra compile-time option. No, DFS is set for certain channels on wireless-regdb/CRDA, I just posted DFS master region support for wireless-regdb and CRDA. Apart from this we then need driver support. To get DFS you need all of these + hostapd part. Each one has its own set of components and does deserve its own set of tests and review. Luis -- 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
