Return-path: Received: from mail-iy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.210.174]:59620 "EHLO mail-iy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752145Ab2CHVHS convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2012 16:07:18 -0500 Received: by iagz16 with SMTP id z16so1208263iag.19 for ; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 13:07:18 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4F591E14.4010000@broadcom.com> References: <20120307194001.GA2506@ubuntu-macmini> <20120308174101.GB28133@ubuntu-macmini> <4B96CD77D9161244899852B5F20DB5B70125BB72@nasanexd02d.na.qualcomm.com> <4B96CD77D9161244899852B5F20DB5B70125BC94@nasanexd02d.na.qualcomm.com> <20120308200734.GC28133@ubuntu-macmini> <4F591E14.4010000@broadcom.com> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 13:06:57 -0800 Message-ID: (sfid-20120308_220723_987695_2E3A210E) Subject: Re: Problems with regulatory domain support and BCM43224 To: Arend van Spriel Cc: Seth Forshee , "Quan, David" , "Green, Michael" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , Johannes Berg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Arend van Spriel wrote: > On 03/08/2012 09:07 PM, Seth Forshee wrote: >> >> On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 11:51:03AM -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Quan, David >>>  wrote: >>>> >>>> I think there is to it more than SW. >>>> Where ever you get this card, is the card tested and regulatory approved >>>> for those countries, DFS or not? >>> >>> >>> Seth, what driver are you using? I know you are using a BCM43224 card. >> >> >> brcmsmac >> >>>> It is possible that this card is only regulatory tested for non DFS >>>> channels, but now you enable them for passive. >>> >>> >>> That's a good point. >>> >>>> This means that yes, you are save and not violate DFS rules because you >>>> are in passive mode. However, you are in complete violation if the STA finds >>>> an AP on that DFS channel and then connects and transmits as this STA is not >>>> allow to transmit on that channel since it is not approved. >>> >>> >>> If the driver being used is a supported vendor driver then I'll punt >>> this to the vendor (Broadcom). If this is the reversed engineered >>> driver (b43) that Broadcom to this day seems to blindly ignore even >>> for regulatory, then I'm happy to recommend based on your input to >>> leave the regulatory domain as-is given that we cannot guarantee what >>> the vendor meant as they have not done any work on releasing either >>> documentation or code to help with their regulatory situation. >> >> >> It would be nice if Broadcom could weigh in. Cc-ing Arend. > > > Hi, Seth > > Noticed your email yesterday, but did not get to chime into the > conversation. brcmsmac does indeed provide a regulatory hint, which is > either from SPROM or hard-coded to "US". Since "X0" is not a known > regulatory domain for crda it does not make sense to pass it as a regulatory > hint. However, the "full" story is told on linuxwireless.org (see [1]). The Linux kernel allows you to define custom regulatory domains, the ath module uses these, it defines 13 of them. You can review that code for an example of how to use them. So your X0 can still be used, you just have to define the data structure. Luis