From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from wolverine02.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.251]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.85_2 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1bUxDW-0000aQ-Ro for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 14:32:20 +0000 From: "Valo, Kalle" Subject: Re: report channel state information (CSI) at ath10k Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 14:31:49 +0000 Message-ID: <874m716i0d.fsf@qca.qualcomm.com> References: In-Reply-To: (YanBo's message of "Sun, 24 Jul 2016 00:22:11 +0800") Content-Language: en-US Content-ID: <001103B44B407B4E801986DB0AFA1587@qualcomm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: YanBo Cc: "Malinen, Jouni" , "michal.kazior@tieto.com" , "ath10k@lists.infradead.org" YanBo writes: > Wonder whether currently ath10k could get the CSI (channel state information) > from the FW for each valid RX packet? I notice the ath9k already has some > patch (not be upstreamed)used to get such information which could be used for > upper layer channel evaluation for research purpose, I remember we haven't > implemented such feature at ath10k as the FW never report such information, but > still need get your confirmation. This is the first time I'm even hearing about CSI so I can't really help much, sorry. -- Kalle Valo _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k