From: Seth Forshee <sforshee@kernel.org>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: bkil <b.K.il.h.u+tigbuh@gmail.com>,
wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [wireless-regdb] [PATCH v2] wireless-regdb: recent FCC report and order allows 5850-5895 immediately
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 14:22:28 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YRQjdJ05h+Vy1gjl@ubuntu-x1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1f441ba830535161b62086c1fee0d027b36bffc6.camel@sipsolutions.net>
On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 10:06:31PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Uh, sorry for the delay.
> >
> > The first is that it seems I forgot to test build this patch before I
> > pushed it. The PTMP-ONLY flag isn't allowed by db2fw.py. This was done
> > by Johannes for reasons which aren't explained, so maybe he can shed
> > some light on it. The flag doesn't appear to be used by the kernel or
> > hostapd, so maybe it was deprecated long ago. Anyway, I've pushed a
> > change to remove this flag.
>
> I don't remember, but quite likely we decided it was just not something
> we could implement properly or so, and never supported it? Sorry.
>
> Clearly the kernel does nothing at all with NL80211_RRF_PTMP_ONLY.
>
> > The second problem is more serious. I thought that we could allow 160
> > MHz bandwidth across two AUTO-BW ranges too small for this bandwidth,
> > but it turns out that the kernel rejects any rules with a bandwidth
> > greater than the frequency range of the rule. I'm not sure what we can
> > do about this. Even if the kernel were changed to support allowing
> > greater bandwidths across combined ranges, we're going to have a
> > backwards compatibility problem with older kernels.
>
> OTOH, doesn't AUTO-BW basically ignore the max bandwidth for a given
> range anyway, seeing the code in reg_get_max_bandwidth_from_range()? So
> just keeping it at 80 with AUTO-BW would still result in 160 being
> usable? I think?
Yeah, I think you're right. So I guess the changes we ended up with
should allow 160 Mz across these ranges.
Thanks,
Seth
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-11 19:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-03 22:40 [PATCH] wireless-regdb: recent FCC report and order allows 5850-5895 immediately bkil
2020-12-04 15:11 ` Seth Forshee
2020-12-05 20:24 ` b.K.il.h.u+tigbuh
2020-12-07 4:32 ` Seth Forshee
2020-12-07 10:10 ` b.K.il.h.u+tigbuh
2020-12-07 13:54 ` Seth Forshee
2021-06-08 15:47 ` Seth Forshee
2021-06-30 15:17 ` b.K.il.h.u+tigbuh
2021-06-30 16:03 ` [PATCH v2] " bkil
2021-07-06 15:51 ` Seth Forshee
2021-07-08 19:42 ` Seth Forshee
2021-08-09 20:06 ` Johannes Berg
2021-08-11 19:22 ` Seth Forshee [this message]
2021-07-06 15:45 ` [PATCH] " Seth Forshee
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YRQjdJ05h+Vy1gjl@ubuntu-x1 \
--to=sforshee@kernel.org \
--cc=b.K.il.h.u+tigbuh@gmail.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).