On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 09:28:27AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Sun, 2012-09-23 at 09:49 +0200, Vladimir Kondratiev wrote: > > Without a fix for this even though channels 1-3 are allowed world > > wide on the rule (57240 - 63720 @ 2160), channel 2 at 60480 MHz > > will end up getting disabled given that it is 3240 MHz from > > both the frequency rule start and end frequency. Fix this by > > using 2 GHz separation assumption for the 2.4 and 5 GHz bands > > but for 60 GHz use a 10 GHz separation before assuming a rule > > is not part of the band. > > Luis, given that you think the regulatory code in the kernel is 802.11 > specific, why are we inferring these rules from the frequencies rather > than using the 802.11 specific information about the band that it > represents? :-D Its a good point freq_reg_info() is at the crux of where we do are still agnostic to 802.11. To make this 802.11 specific and easier to read I suspect we can require passing the chan struct and then we'd use a switch statement for the band. 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
