MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAB=NE6Vi2sun6vJy=yZSJ9HjHxD17FO-GmXtYybcjLVPSt9+wA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1316453903-75710-1-git-send-email-nbd@openwrt.org>
 <1316453903-75710-2-git-send-email-nbd@openwrt.org> <CAB=NE6XvanRQ6Yje_qHhkfzbLmZn9o5Q+5y1NobJwCyuMLFEvg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4E77AAFB.1080805@openwrt.org> <CAB=NE6XgSz7zz_ZXaPQEsaue307ipd7Qnzgi5QWr8Y4SS1j=Lg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4E77B25D.9070907@openwrt.org> <CAB=NE6XLdftXKg5-wvme8Vg7BjGi-TpxQ3G6m=7VnEw89YzXoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAB=NE6XQDqG+En2KWOyKGUVT1SWm1rwMwOxMjpE8CjYfvwvOqw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4E77BC58.7040204@openwrt.org> <CAB=NE6Vi2sun6vJy=yZSJ9HjHxD17FO-GmXtYybcjLVPSt9+wA@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@qca.qualcomm.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 15:13:00 -0700
Message-ID: <CAB=NE6UzRhp=51QacoRzMPad0vO1qkNxK3=rayPuYXdjA3ZOJQ@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20110920_001331_767288_45C054C0)
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] ath9k_hw: clean up tx power handling
To: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linville@tuxdriver.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
<mcgrof@qca.qualcomm.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org> wrote:
>> On 2011-09-19 11:54 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
>>> <mcgrof@qca.qualcomm.com>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Felix Fietkau<nbd@openwrt.org>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  I looked at the other ath driver and I see no indication that it's
>>>>> related
>>>>>  to DFS in any way.
>>>>
>>>>  I have verified this just now as well, it seems it was only used to
>>>>  support an ioctl to userspace to enable users to update a tpscale
>>>>  value but I see no documentation about this. Next question is who in
>>>>  usersapce sets this. I wonder if its done through userspace after
>>>>  measuring some TPC reports from STAs.
>>>
>>> So this comes from supporting a "TR-098" specification, which seems to
>>> be the "Internet Gateway Device data model for the CPE WAN Management
>>> Protocol". I haven't yet been able to map this to the specification
>>> respective component:
>>>
>>> http://www.broadband-forum.org/technical/download/TR-098.pdf
>>
>> Interesting. That definitely supports my point that ath9k is the wrong place
>> for something like this to be. Let's just get rid of it.
>
> Yeah, I'm now convinced :) die code. But please do add some blurb
> about this tumor the code had.

In fact removing the tumor through a separate patch would be appreciated.

  Luis