On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 03:57:07PM +0100, Arend van Spriel wrote: > On 11/16/2012 02:28 PM, Johannes Berg wrote: > >On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 17:39 +0530, Mahesh Palivela wrote: > > > >>vht regulatory code already posted long back. After went through several > >>back n forth emails from Luis Rodriguez, accepted the patch. > >>But not commited anywhere. > >>Now I have to change that to match to new structs like chan_def etc from > >>the vht channel work patches you posted 5 days back. > >> > >>Also helper funcs to replace chan->flags bit checking to dynamically > >>check channel through regulatory > > > >Yeah, actually I'm not sure it's that easy. We'll also need per > >bandwidth TX power restrictions, raise the 40 MHz bandwidth restriction > >to 160 MHz (or get rid of it entirely), etc. That seems to require a new > >regulatory database format? > > Luis discussed the regulatory framework during the wireless summit > in Barcelona last week. My (possibly limited) recollection was that > the current regulatory code can accommodate VHT limits as well. I > assume that also includes the regulatory database format. The only thing mentioned which I had not considered is the per bandwidth TX power restrictions. Where did these come from ? 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
