From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-la0-f42.google.com ([209.85.215.42]:57437 "EHLO mail-la0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753188AbaETN0u (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 May 2014 09:26:50 -0400 Received: by mail-la0-f42.google.com with SMTP id el20so394164lab.29 for ; Tue, 20 May 2014 06:26:48 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1399624824-9204-1-git-send-email-janusz.dziedzic@tieto.com> Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 15:26:48 +0200 Message-ID: (sfid-20140520_152703_370909_DC8595CD) Subject: Re: [PATCH] wireless-regdb: add DFS CAC time parameter From: Janusz Dziedzic To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Cc: "wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org" , linux-wireless Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 20 May 2014 09:33, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 1:40 AM, Janusz Dziedzic > wrote: >> Introduce support for setting DFS CAC time >> in milliseconds. >> >> Eg. >> (5250 - 5330 @ AUTO), (20), (60000), DFS >> >> will setup CAC 60 seconds CAC time. > > Can you elaborate whether or not this will require a bump on CRDA and > issuing of two new wireless-regdb files for the different versions on > the commit log? > Yes, sure - will add this. BTW, probably you know, why we decide to split usermode regulatory code into crda, regdb? This required binary interface between them and a lot of "not needed" code? Why we don't simply zip/sign db.tx code and parse this direrctly in crda and use just one user mode project for that. What was the reason for have regulatory in binary file? BR Janusz