Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
CC:     <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 24 Jul 2019 15:40:41 +0200
Message-ID: <16c243667a8.279b.9b12b7fc0a3841636cfb5e919b41b954@broadcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <fbacce3dd78c2154ee21c4f26f76a18a18349f45.camel@sipsolutions.net>
References: <1561461027-10793-1-git-send-email-arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
 <fbacce3dd78c2154ee21c4f26f76a18a18349f45.camel@sipsolutions.net>
User-Agent: AquaMail/1.20.0-1462 (build: 102100002)
Subject: Re: [RFC V2 0/8] nl80211: add 6GHz band support
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On July 24, 2019 11:35:14 AM Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote:

> Hi Arend,
>
>
>
>
> After all the discussion, I think we want this?

I think so yes. Even if it is just informational for user-space it seems to 
make sense for kernel side.

> Care to resend?

Will do.

> I think I want it at least because we shouldn't advertise HT/VHT on 6
> GHz as is (just as part of HE) and that's easier if we have a different
> band enum, for the capability storage...

Right.

>
>> The only place I could find an
>> issue with this is in cfg80211_wext_freq(). Not sure how to deal with
>> that so it is not part of this series.
>
> Just finally break wext and say if you want to use 6 GHz you need to use
> nl80211? :)

Probably is true for he support as well. Not sure. Have not been using wext 
for the last decade ;-)

Regards,
Arend