Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:16a7:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id gp39csp955999pxb; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 23:39:18 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwP4J/65JUKImMAMPxuQDsXK6eHcSkK9xoO1Cfs5zPIxCYjNMxuJVVZYKX1iuL+4AEvBpqM X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:cc4c:: with SMTP id mm12mr769875ejb.141.1605253157989; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 23:39:17 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1605253157; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=oK/11qR9kE+mONmhU/DkeVWEz5aMnYselkdOKZv9OJQag9nNGLZPX1DjsNczB5CA19 h2sY9ik4TP7oh7QPlBR3SR4JGhWQNWNSPWA3S2mMmUUMIHQ6eLQoUK0PJjb43BNJ9Zf1 w/B92Zm4Bauk/qWw1u+Fzi+MhCL3BVHQ/oLL/rskMtb/i4R+dLxHQ/UezZeUaVw9MBb5 MTcidr2bup5/MyBtiQm0xkM28ISKZQ/rNL+xYpTI+q05vMXjOG74ITNC3ftqyJZbESvb oRK8My0mSjzv+RKk63Qcg9b3YqBKajm8pPkb8vzPBaJatSrMQ6FzDwjC2Pwiig0C0x27 LDvw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject :message-id; bh=xOz3B3qhcbpqD5qVZiojFv6EsK6poFHR5uuigZc5FXc=; b=eGyKhYzbAItrKo02NjbtAuTEG4WjNTp38ikt+C3DhiTaHbHK+yuXAX9jflz57hEC4i KNg+E4+oQL+3GKwm2OerXHFHHI4UUooLtgn3qwBNFs/kOF7vKbGEEKBY9SuQrwx4d/8q EPpu3r22QlrJ2SzUrC2BbBNoMBcLadejbWJzrgdBuWn8ZNl9QgbsUGhfR+TyPLsFhOu8 ZjlYWpMiCSOHByusmrm8m4ogCF2Vst+xQLXx954I6Clsicssxy+2iofcd3dr96LFRh9e rliHSoHukb0S/fnxyntGnRCFuyyjtbvjy8d3otBWX01VTwl3K/OHdMRjZUnLC86chQt3 8H4g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id k12si5174008ejr.406.2020.11.12.23.38.40; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 23:39:17 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726363AbgKMHiN (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:38:13 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50196 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726352AbgKMHiN (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:38:13 -0500 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:4433::2]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0664EC0613D1; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 23:38:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1kdTer-006oa3-07; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 08:38:09 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mac80211: reject/clear user rate mask if not usable From: Johannes Berg To: Wen Gong , Arend Van Spriel Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, kirtika@google.com, linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org, ath11k@lists.infradead.org, ath10k@lists.infradead.org Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 08:38:07 +0100 In-Reply-To: <4b8f37fde23262547edb6ed4635cf89b@codeaurora.org> References: <20170308132022.4216-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net> <07179008e9369bc81e152009ca85191d@codeaurora.org> <5decc452-7b2a-db1d-c5eb-04ab6bb61553@broadcom.com> <4b8f37fde23262547edb6ed4635cf89b@codeaurora.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.5 (3.36.5-1.fc32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2020-11-13 at 10:08 +0800, Wen Gong wrote: > > > Which was the intent of this change, wasn't it? Indeed. Permitting this leads to warnings later. > We need to set the tx rate to fixed at a single rate, e.g., > 54M/48M/36M... for a test case. > I do not want a clear error message, I want to the 54M rate pass/set > success to lower wlan driver. > Then lower wlan driver can handle it. No, that will not happen. You should configure your test AP to actually support 54M. johannes