From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from he.sipsolutions.net ([78.46.109.217]:37113 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757380Ab1IANSb (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2011 09:18:31 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] nl80211: Parse channel type attribute in an IBSS join request From: Johannes Berg To: Alexander Simon Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <2366540.2f8oa1FYLX@alex-1> (sfid-20110831_154959_513147_E3C5B58E) References: <2053881.ENil2Dy3QM@alex-1> <1314772577.4161.12.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> <2366540.2f8oa1FYLX@alex-1> (sfid-20110831_154959_513147_E3C5B58E) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 15:18:28 +0200 Message-ID: <1314883108.4022.21.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20110901_151836_271591_EF94450B) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 15:49 +0200, Alexander Simon wrote: > > Use for what? That's confusing. You're asking if it can be used for > > beaconing, as the old function name *clearly* said. Now you're making it > > confusing. > I'm not only asking for beaconing. In 4/4, i am using this function to see if > regdom allows me to use HT40 on the extension channel (beacons and data > traffic). Hence can_use_ext_chan. > > Even cfg80211_set_freq in net/wireless/chan.c uses this to see if we can > communicate (see printk) on that channel. > > So my suggestion would be to use that name. But I'd also use the old if > preferred. But the type of usage should be made clear. You're going to use it for uncontrolled transmissions, so regulatory rules that apply are different than "can I use this channel to connect to an AP" for example. The "can beacon" made that obvious. Obviously, if I can beacon, I can also TX data, but vice versa isn't necessarily true depending on regulatory rules, since data TX can happen controlled by the AP (e.g. DFS channels). johannes