From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-path: <ath11k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org>
Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([2a01:4f8:191:4433::2]
 helo=sipsolutions.net)
 by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux))
 id 1jeDAj-0008Rx-Lm
 for ath11k@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 28 May 2020 07:41:51 +0000
Message-ID: <6a606d4e32d6eb00b33f5ce8ad44a71994640c7d.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/11] cfg80211: use only HE capability to set
 prohibited flags in 6 GHz
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 09:41:46 +0200
In-Reply-To: <0fa1c07811796add4a6a23c81cbafe41@codeaurora.org>
References: <1589399105-25472-1-git-send-email-rmanohar@codeaurora.org>
 <7f2a2a382c42b7285b9ad1eeac4e8060bc8d897a.camel@sipsolutions.net>
 <0fa1c07811796add4a6a23c81cbafe41@codeaurora.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <ath11k.lists.infradead.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/options/ath11k>,
 <mailto:ath11k-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/ath11k/>
List-Post: <mailto:ath11k@lists.infradead.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ath11k-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath11k>,
 <mailto:ath11k-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: "ath11k" <ath11k-bounces@lists.infradead.org>
Errors-To: ath11k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org
To: Rajkumar Manoharan <rmanohar@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Vamsi Krishna <vamsin@codeaurora.org>, linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath11k@lists.infradead.org, kvalo@codeaurora.org

On Wed, 2020-05-27 at 16:32 -0700, Rajkumar Manoharan wrote:
> 
> > However, looking at D6.0, maybe we do need some checks of the HE
> > capability?
> > 
> > > +			if (!(he_cap->he_cap_elem.phy_cap_info[0] &
> > > +			      IEEE80211_HE_PHY_CAP0_CHANNEL_WIDTH_SET_40MHZ_80MHZ_IN_5G))
> > > +				return false;
> > 
> > Looks like even D6.0 still changed something in this area...
> > 
> > Evidently our patch just assumed that in 6 GHz all of this is 
> > supported,
> > but the spec doesn't support that theory :-)
> > 
> IIUC the same bits are applicable for both 5 GHz & 6 GHz. I understand 
> the macro doesn't capture both.

Yeah, I think you're right. I looked at D6.0 (though there seems to be
D6.1?) but I couldn't quite 

> > Can you respin this with D6.0 taken into account?
> > 
> Let me check again and respin after your series. Does it sound good?

Ok. I'll include our more limited code in the series for now then, and
we can make changes to that after we're on the same page.

Thanks,
johannes


_______________________________________________
ath11k mailing list
ath11k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath11k