From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from c60.cesmail.net ([216.154.195.49]:36573 "EHLO c60.cesmail.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752302AbZLASRh (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Dec 2009 13:17:37 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: allow disabling 40MHz on 2.4GHz From: Pavel Roskin To: Johannes Berg Cc: John Linville , linux-wireless In-Reply-To: <1259688582.32171.97.camel@johannes.local> References: <1259688582.32171.97.camel@johannes.local> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:17:26 -0500 Message-Id: <1259691446.4806.12.camel@mj> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 18:29 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > In some situations it is required that a system be > configured with no support for 40 MHz channels in > the 2.4 GHz band. Rather than imposing any such > restrictions on everybody, allow configuration a > system like that with a module parameter. It is > writable at runtime but only takes effect at the > time of the next association. That looks like a hack to me. Maybe it should be treated like other CRDA flags? In fact, you can find this in dbparse.py in the wireless-regdb sources: # hole at bit 9. FIXME: Where is NO-HT40 defined? 'NO-HT40': 1<<10, However, there are no other references to NO-HT40 in the wireless-regdb or CRDA sources. I assume it's not implemented. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin