Return-path: Received: from mail-eopbgr20047.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([40.107.2.47]:30336 "EHLO EUR02-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750810AbeEOT0u (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 May 2018 15:26:50 -0400 Subject: Fwd: Re: [PATCHv2 2/2] ath10k: DFS Host Confirmation References: <72826487-2af6-3c16-e7f8-3b2592416f9d@bowerswilkins.com> To: Sriram R , Kalle Valo , ath10k@lists.infradead.org Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org From: Peter Oh Message-ID: (sfid-20180515_212654_442841_F68BDE73) Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 12:26:34 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <72826487-2af6-3c16-e7f8-3b2592416f9d@bowerswilkins.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > + /* Even in case of radar detection failure we follow the same > + * behaviour as if radar is detected i.e to switch to a different > + * channel. > + */ > + if (status_arg.status == WMI_HW_RADAR_DETECTED || > + status_arg.status == WMI_RADAR_DETECTION_FAIL) > + ath10k_radar_detected(ar); > This behavior is different from what Kalle explained. Failing verification of radar type by FW does not enforce stop DFS channels from using. Kalle?