On 04/17/2012 06:41 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 10:46 -0700, greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:+ /* Get survey stats for current channel */ + survey.filled = 0; + if (drv_get_survey(local, 0,&survey) != 0) { + survey.filled = 0; + data[i++] = 0; + } else { + /* ath9k (and maybe others??) only updates internal stats + * when you get channel index 0, so if + * we are NOT on channel zero, get the real stats + * now. + */ + int ch_idx = ieee80211_get_channel_idx(local->hw.wiphy, + local->oper_channel->center_freq); + if (ch_idx == 0) { + data[i++] = survey.channel->center_freq; + } else { + survey.filled = 0; + if (drv_get_survey(local, ch_idx,&survey) != 0) { + survey.filled = 0; + data[i++] = 0; + } else { + data[i++] = survey.channel->center_freq; + } + } + }This is completely incomprehensible to me. I don't think the channel index is what you think it is?
It is ugly, but as far as I can tell it works. The survey method wants an index, not channel number or frequency, from what I can tell (I just looked at and tested ath9k). Based on the freq returned as part of the survey results, the logic above appears to function as I would hope. That said, a new get-survey() method that took a channel object instead of an index would make this code cleaner. Or, we could store the channel index in the channel object for fast lookup, but I was afraid storing the index would be too risky in case channels are ever moved around for some reason or another. And, I could be missing something yet.... Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com -- 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
