Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:5 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:5;
Message-ID: <e65522be907a2bb3094a209ec2ebe87d6302351a.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] wifi: radiotap: add bandwidth definition of EHT
 U-SIG
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To:     Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>, kvalo@kernel.org
Cc:     linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Date:   Mon, 09 Oct 2023 17:48:36 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20231006131327.16806-6-pkshih@realtek.com>
References: <20231006131327.16806-1-pkshih@realtek.com>
         <20231006131327.16806-6-pkshih@realtek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.48.4 (3.48.4-1.fc38) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 2023-10-06 at 21:13 +0800, Ping-Ke Shih wrote:
> https://www.radiotap.org/fields/U-SIG.html defines bandwidth field but
> no enumerators there, so reference to the values defined by wireshark [1]=
.
>=20
> [1] https://github.com/wireshark/wireshark/blob/master/epan/dissectors/pa=
cket-ieee80211-radiotap.c#L2466
>=20

Well. The entries here should be coming from the spec, see Table 36-28
"U-SIG field of an EHT MU PPDU" in 802.11be (D3.0) (or 36-31, it's the
same since it's U-SIG-1 common part).

So maybe we should define them in ieee80211.h?

But at the very least I think the patch description (and perhaps
comments in the code) should reference that, rather than wireshark
sources :)

johannes