Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54567 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755875Ab2HPKWb (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Aug 2012 06:22:31 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 12:22:11 +0200 From: Stanislaw Gruszka To: Mahesh Palivela Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "linville@tuxdriver.com" , "johannes@sipsolutions.net" Subject: Re: [PATCH] cfg80211: VHT (11ac) Regulatory change Message-ID: <20120816102211.GD17659@redhat.com> (sfid-20120816_122332_281899_9D86993B) References: <952C5D5D0470AE4FB7D8A75C6ADC71CA0FCDD559@mbx022-e1-nj-10.exch022.domain.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <952C5D5D0470AE4FB7D8A75C6ADC71CA0FCDD559@mbx022-e1-nj-10.exch022.domain.local> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 03:55:26PM +0000, Mahesh Palivela wrote: > Handling of 80 MHz, 160 MHz channel bandwidths for VHT (11ac) Regulatory > and setting channel flags for allowed bandwidths. > > Signed-off-by: Mahesh Palivela > --- > > Sending patch second time as Stanislaw Gruszka complained its malformed. And now complaining that patch is ugly. There is really on other, simpler way to handle that? Stanislaw