Return-path: Received: from mail.atheros.com ([12.36.123.2]:38742 "EHLO mail.atheros.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760133AbZLOTCu convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:02:50 -0500 Received: from mail.atheros.com ([10.10.20.104]) by sidewinder.atheros.com for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:02:50 -0800 Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:02:48 -0800 From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" To: =?utf-8?B?THVrw6HFoQ==?= Turek <8an@praha12.net> CC: "johannes@sipsolutions.net" , "ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "linville@tuxdriver.com" Subject: Re: [ath5k-devel] [PATCH 1/5] nl80211: Add new WIPHY attribute COVERAGE_CLASS Message-ID: <20091215190248.GE2123@tux> References: <1260899813-17585-1-git-send-email-8an@praha12.net> <1260899813-17585-2-git-send-email-8an@praha12.net> <20091215190051.GC2123@tux> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" In-Reply-To: <20091215190051.GC2123@tux> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:00:51AM -0800, Luis Rodriguez wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 09:56:48AM -0800, Lukáš Turek wrote: > > The new attribute NL80211_ATTR_WIPHY_COVERAGE_CLASS sets IEEE 802.11 > > Coverage Class, which depends on maximum distance of nodes in a > > wireless network. It's required for long distance links (more than a few > > hundred meters). > > > > The attribute is now ignored by two non-mac80211 drivers, rndis and > > iwmc3200wifi, together with WIPHY_PARAM_RETRY_SHORT and > > WIPHY_PARAM_RETRY_LONG. If it turns out to be a problem, we could split > > set_wiphy_params callback or add new capability bits. > > > > Signed-off-by: Lukas Turek <8an@praha12.net> > > @@ -803,9 +807,16 @@ static int nl80211_set_wiphy(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info) > > changed |= WIPHY_PARAM_RTS_THRESHOLD; > > } > > > > + if (info->attrs[NL80211_ATTR_WIPHY_COVERAGE_CLASS]) { > > + coverage_class = nla_get_u8( > > + info->attrs[NL80211_ATTR_WIPHY_COVERAGE_CLASS]); > > + changed |= WIPHY_PARAM_COVERAGE_CLASS; > > + } > > + > > Does setting the coverage class make sense for all modes of operation? > > If not it'd be good to catch those early and avoid setting them and also > properly document them. > > The AP seems to pass the coverage class on country IE, so I guess > this means we can support this for AP mode and IBSS and only through the > country IE for STA. And if your IBSS and the AP already sent the coverage class through the country IE I am not sure if we should allow overriding it. > Mind you that would mean hostapd would need to kick > the coverage class as well and some new code on cfg80211 reg.c > country_ie_2_rd() to parse it. > > Doesn't seem to make sense to set this for monitor interfaces. Luis