On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 15:38 +0200, Zefir Kurtisi wrote: > No, it serves its purpose to ensure hostapd is not going mad and tries > to enable TX before the CAC is over via redundant checks. > > What I'm saying is this: we defined that DFS regulatory compliance is > provided by and distributed over driver, mac80211, and hostapd. We > always must ensure that a working combination of those operates in > compliance. But we have no control over it when a component is exchanged > or modified. Right, but if hostapd does something unexpected, in the code the kernel attempts to verify that it did in fact do radar checking for a certain minimum amount of time. I pointed out how those checks are ineffective, and how they should be fixed. > Back to topic: as stated above, radar_detection_timeout should be per > wiphy. That would also resolve your concern, right? No. johannes -- 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
