On 10/24/2012 10:31 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 09:27 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
-static int ieee80211_get_tx_power(struct wiphy *wiphy, int *dbm)
+static int ieee80211_get_tx_power(struct wiphy *wiphy,
+ struct wireless_dev *wdev,
+ int *dbm)
{
struct ieee80211_local *local = wiphy_priv(wiphy);
Do we really set mbm and read back dbm?
Yeah, we did nl80211 APIs in mBm and reading back is only for wext
compatibility so was dBm ... hindsight being 20/20 we should probably
never have used mBm, nothing supports it anyway.
ath9k *could* support 1/2 dBm settings from what I remember, but
I am not sure there is any way to currently configure it for that.
@@ -1588,6 +1588,11 @@ static int nl80211_set_wiphy(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info)
enum nl80211_tx_power_setting type;
int idx, mbm = 0;
+ if (!wdev) {
+ result = -EOPNOTSUPP;
+ goto bad_res;
+ }
I guess this is the part that breaks backwards compat when trying to set wiphy?
If it does stay like this, maybe add a WARN_ON_ONCE that tells users to fix their
user-space?
Right. Add a user triggerable warning in code like that seems like a
really bad idea to me though. Maybe a message, that seems to have some
precedent, but I suppose nobody will really see it anyway?
WARN_ON_ONCE would be once per boot, and it shows stack (and calling user-space application).
It will show up in distribution bug reports automatically in some cases so calling
code might actually get fixed fairly quickly.
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
