Return-path: Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([144.76.43.152]:48803 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753503Ab3KNOow (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:44:52 -0500 Message-ID: <1384440286.13941.27.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20131114_154455_861907_9B43E27B) Subject: Re: [RFC 3/5] cfg80211: add regulatory quiescing support From: Johannes Berg To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Cc: janusz.dziedzic@tieto.com, j@w1.fi, sunitb@qca.qualcomm.com, rsunki@qca.qualcomm.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 15:44:46 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20131114141105.GB19070@garbanzo.do-not-panic.com> (sfid-20131114_150029_534220_D0403B29) References: <1384366379-25301-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com> <1384366379-25301-4-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com> <1384377738.28806.15.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <20131114141105.GB19070@garbanzo.do-not-panic.com> (sfid-20131114_150029_534220_D0403B29) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2013-11-14 at 06:11 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 10:22:18PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 19:12 +0100, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > > This quiesces devices when appropriate to ensure that > > > regulatory domain updates take effect and avoid having > > > devices initiate radiation when they should not. > > > > I'm not really sure this makes sense. > > > > If we're staying connected, how can we be moving far enough to go > > through regulatory domains to have totally different rules? > > Don't think of what makes sense, think of the corner cases that > could happen here, such as plugging in a card that disagrees > with regulatory settings, and creates a conflict on DFS regions. > One example might be someone plugging in a USB 802.11 card programmed > for JP in say a FR 802.11 AP, assuming the AP had the USB 802.11 > driver. Another example may be if a user provides an input with > say 'iw reg set JP' on a FR AP. In such cases we want to stop IR, > even if the user was dumb, we'd be respecting the regulatory settings, > as silly as they may be. Think of the other way around, such as plugging in a stupid USB NIC just to see if it works - and suddenly finding your 5 GHz connection broken because that USB NIC said it really needed some stupid country with 2.4 only. I'm not convinced. johannes