On 08/21/2012 01:48 PM, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:50:13AM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote:
Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On the other hand, maybe for VHT we want to completely change channel
specifications? Maybe it would be better to allow specifying the
*global* center frequency of the entire channel, and the width, and the
control channel offset instead of encoding everything into the single
channel type value? I don't know.
What about the future? Will we see 320 MHz wide channels in 2020? :)
Not in 2016 ?
After following the discussion about this I'm starting to think that
what you propose above makes our life easier in the long run. I just
don't trust that using a single channel type value is scalable in the
long run.
Yeh, I think our channel description in code should reflect to what we
have in new spec. That should fit well for legacy channels as well.
Stanislaw
so we are talking about how to specify channel info to cfg/mac80211 from
upper layers. But regulatory tells if that channel config is allowed or not.
so derive channel type from center freq, width and control chan offset.
Then determine if that channel type is allowed from regulatory flags?
In short we have scaled approach on specifying channel info but not
regulatory. Please comment.
Regards,
Mahesh
--
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
