From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-yw1-f173.google.com (mail-yw1-f173.google.com [209.85.128.173]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B672230CE1 for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2023 14:42:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yw1-f173.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-59b4ec8d9c1so23971677b3.0 for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2023 07:42:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1694788940; x=1695393740; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=LgRdWJVK+rQ9hpiYGunZ9pIEpxo7FzTkDd+UHbEf1CY=; b=LJabg+RZP7bw1fWWqGJNAPdgWZuzCBXKJ16qlytlDHeVtz3DE/U4sbMEsjaKqcFo5S pn7Gy5laHBHsBwTrgt2UBzsUg/FN56vkNfldS88O6djC0mjIM7Q9pUNwG1wP0Q0OIxeL fCb8pgBFO0mTas0rr5fzaFCiV0o9GrsWk+USi/qyTeIEKNaxl96u8rvQht50sWu02UKt u9yLMmKDEmm2D9NVefE7scjj6v+DwOlZuMlS39wW8Qe37gvXXHYeRpNw/CJf69aWB2wr SiWbNNa1vnwrj5ITtECmbydOFc1hQazdvrLBNZNti9yDKNI5finugOfCD/bcCXk/UsuU BuXg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1694788940; x=1695393740; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=LgRdWJVK+rQ9hpiYGunZ9pIEpxo7FzTkDd+UHbEf1CY=; b=YtELmt+yqABekn2x/3YqjUg0juuyBU6pDcQjh68WGR0ErwWj6ir/H2CGVlubwSBRyg wjVqZsZUVWZfv57gzAFSrrFqeKqB5UJaTyaUUOxjfVfWioj7s9jFEwDQ8XSKjiw7cr/T lzNjF6S+WfxCyPipYwNF0ygeFN+8m2Dg/ujKQGCagEo1cEZh0WKw23yEDW6vZhGP7jj6 E0chfib09U3IhScnhngy03fQ8LzJtGm+7T6UV+KNK4RsXNXM14tik4XOPE6Pto+6b/E/ eT6IiZ/Yeo+dL+6UCLuFuC5aWHaEBwQnLmiNggmXZt3c58bKQU0Pw+ulcrypby5AJodQ V8RA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyvZ2kdF5D18ImLR0gCnglMBoybtREH7pNbq2OAKsodMoHnZg9l 5UGmqopamm22bSeJOmGSXxI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGpz5qe17UMKClZ8WL/Sj6I/XSPZTaBgbgarSbtoDkRrBpe1c0jBWyrC8G4jrc22Y8H4FQKSg== X-Received: by 2002:a81:4f8d:0:b0:59b:f46d:a54 with SMTP id d135-20020a814f8d000000b0059bf46d0a54mr1838865ywb.14.1694788940499; Fri, 15 Sep 2023 07:42:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.102.4.159] (50-78-19-50-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [50.78.19.50]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o8-20020a817308000000b00594fff48796sm891576ywc.75.2023.09.15.07.42.19 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 15 Sep 2023 07:42:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8629e294-0550-436d-91b3-e0cf1c84f8e7@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 07:42:17 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: iwd@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Force use of 5GHz band Content-Language: en-US To: Denis Kenzior , =?UTF-8?Q?Jonas_Gro=C3=9Fe_Sundrup?= , iwd@lists.linux.dev References: <34795e04-66e4-4359-a6b2-59b3f47eaf64@gmail.com> <6aac9366-36fd-474d-882e-1bcc940fb444@gmail.com> <43d47533-a4a3-e3d5-8f17-30467475660a@gmail.com> From: James Prestwood In-Reply-To: <43d47533-a4a3-e3d5-8f17-30467475660a@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Denis, On 9/15/23 7:30 AM, Denis Kenzior wrote: > Hi James, > > On 9/14/23 13:33, James Prestwood wrote: >> >> On 9/14/23 11:22 AM, Jonas Große Sundrup wrote: >>> On Thu, 2023-09-14 at 11:16 -0700, James Prestwood wrote: >>>> Yep that would do it. >>> >>> automatically quick scan upon start: https://p.nnev.de/12646 >>> >>> explicit scan triggered via "station wifi scan": >>> https://p.nnev.de/12647 >>> >>> anything insightful in there? >> >> A value of 1000 should definitely work... Are you sure the syntax is >> right inside main.conf: > > Careful about using high factors like this.  Right now the rank is > computed using a double, but truncated to a uint32_t and clamped to > USHRT_MAX / uint16_t.  This works fine, but the FT roaming calculation > is a bit more careless.  Could lead to very funny results. I don't think FT uses that ranking factor, but either way yes some huge factor like that shouldn't be needed. > > We may be better off introducing 2.4GHz factor and suggesting using a > 0.0 multiplier to turn bands off.  Or add an explicit setting. I actually was thinking this would be nice. We actually don't even run a 2.4ghz network at all so that would reduce extra scanning cycles, even if just a couple seconds. I'll go ahead and add support for 0.0 factors disabling the band, and add a 2.4 factor setting. > > Regards, > -Denis >