Re: [PATCH 1/2] nl80211: vendor-cmd: qca: add dynamic SAR power limits

[Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>]

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 6:24 AM Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote:

> > Good, I was just checking that we all are on the same page.
>
> But are we? ;-)

I think you were deferring to, "how would user space use it?" And,
"would a common API really help anyone?" (And then you implied
"anyone" = "Chrome OS.")

I expressed a moderate benefit from a common API, but I'd settle for a
non-common (but upstream) one instead. I also doubt many
non-hardware-customized Linux distributions will make use of this any
time soon.

I don't think that implied you were truly on a different page. But
your response below may say otherwise:

> I don't really see anything in the new proposal [1] that really explains
> why the common API that we've sort of vaguely outlined in this thread
> couldn't work? It just speaks of technical difficulties ("need a
> reporting API too"), but should we let that stop us?
>
> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11686317/

Indeed, I don't see any reason beyond technical difficulties.

I'd love to have a few extra hours in my day to spend on writing such
an API, if that would really unblock months of deadlock.
Unfortunately, those hours tend to get eaten by all sorts of other
things these days, so an honest assessment would probably say I won't
get around to it soon. SAR regulatory concerns aren't really sexy
enough to convince me to spend my weekends on it... (...oh wait, it's
Friday evening already. Hmm.)

Regards,
Brian