Re: RECAP: indication of channel noise

[Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1066 bytes --]

On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 14:42 +0100, Holger Schurig wrote:

> [snip descriptions]

sounds about right

> We did not yet come up with a clear API definition for this. My 
> idea for an initial "retrieve site survey" response is:
> 
> NL80211_CMD_NEW_SURVEY_RESULTS
>   NL80211_ATTR_GENERATION
>   NL80211_ATTR_IFINDEX
>   NL80211_BSS_FREQUENCY
>   NL80211_BSS_NOISE_MBM
> 
> Of course this will extend over time, but that is easy due to 
> nl80211.

I'm not really happy with having "BSS" in there. And the ifindex is
kinda not necessary either I think, you really want the wiphy index.
Also it's not necessary in the response since the request will contain
the wiphy index (or interface index).

I'd introduce a new
NL80211_CMD_GET_SURVEY_RESULT

which you use together with a dumpit call, for channels, which lists
channels one by one similar to nl80211_dump_scan()/nl80211_send_bss()
but with nl80211_dump_survey()/nl80211_send_survey_channel().

In this case I think a "last updated" value would be rather important
too.

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]