On Tue, 2012-12-04 at 10:13 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > >> When in world roaming mode, allow 40 MHz to be used > >> on channels 12 and 13 so that an AP that is, e.g., > >> using HT40+ on channel 9 (in the UK) can be used. > > > > Well, hold on.. this can't possibly work now :( > > > > This is what happens when Luis and I disagree ... > > > > I thought the bandwidth in a given section means the bandwidth that can > > be used from this section, > > No, indeed that was the objective. That's not what's implemented though. > > Luis implemented it to mean that a channel > > overlapping any part of that section can only use that much bandwidth. > > This was a side effect of the checks we have in place, it was not expected. But this is what happens due to the reg.c implementation -- it checks that the freqband into which the primary and secondary channel fall each allows 40 MHz, even if they are two different freqbands. > > Note sure which was intended? > > Technically speaking the math should be possible to figure out to > enable HT40 or not based on peer channels and although that was > assumed the user reported it not allowing HT40 due to the peer > channels not allowing HT40. I took your patch as an assumption that > was not possible. Indeed this is what we had, but I built the db.txt parser based on the assumption that in fact "@ 20" in the channel 11/12 freqband would have been sufficient to allow 40 Mhz on channel 9+. This isn't the case in the kernel implementation today. johannes
