Re: [RFCv2] cfg80211: 80Mhz Bandwidth channel flags in 5Gig band

[Mahesh <maheshp@posedge.com>]

On 02/24/2012 01:25 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 10:55 +0530, Mahesh wrote:
>
>> Agree. we will work towards updating regulatory database with 80Mhz
>> bandwidth in 5Gig band. I had modified code to check maximum bandwidth
>> as well. Please find the updated change below.
>
>> -	if (freq_range->max_bandwidth_khz<  MHZ_TO_KHZ(40))
>> -		bw_flags = IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_HT40;
>> +	if (freq_range->max_bandwidth_khz<  MHZ_TO_KHZ(40)) {
>> +		bw_flags = IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_HT40 | IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_VHT80;
>> +    } else if (freq_range->max_bandwidth_khz<  MHZ_TO_KHZ(80)) {
>> +		bw_flags = IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_VHT80;
>> +    }
>
> no braces needed
>
> Also this will always be true now, so the patch isn't very useful right
> now?
True. But once reg database reflects 80MHz BW, we need it. Anyways its 
part of new feature. Not a bug fix.
>
>
>> -	if (freq_range->max_bandwidth_khz<  MHZ_TO_KHZ(40))
>> -		bw_flags = IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_HT40;
>> +	if (freq_range->max_bandwidth_khz<  MHZ_TO_KHZ(40)) {
>> +		bw_flags = IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_HT40 | IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_VHT80;
>> +    } else if (freq_range->max_bandwidth_khz<  MHZ_TO_KHZ(80)) {
>> +		bw_flags = IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_VHT80;
>> +    }
>
> Seems some refactoring could be useful since this is duplicated?
May be a macro?

>
> johannes
>