From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([5.9.151.49]:35175 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750738AbbFKJqp (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2015 05:46:45 -0400 Message-ID: <1434016002.1915.7.camel@sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20150611_114648_121723_4E771214) Subject: Re: Exposing enum ieee80211_channel_flags to user From: Johannes Berg To: =?UTF-8?Q?Rafa=C5=82_Mi=C5=82ecki?= Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 11:46:42 +0200 In-Reply-To: <1434015922.1915.6.camel@sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20150611_114527_922690_7AF6C2D9) References: (sfid-20150611_113544_857208_070F0480) <1434015922.1915.6.camel@sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20150611_114527_922690_7AF6C2D9) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2015-06-11 at 11:45 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2015-06-11 at 11:35 +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > > > iw also wasn't helpful: > > Frequencies: > > * 5180 MHz [36] (30.0 dBm) > > * 5200 MHz [40] (30.0 dBm) > > * 5220 MHz [44] (30.0 dBm) > > * 5240 MHz [48] (30.0 dBm) > > > > After some in-kernel debugging (nl80211_set_wiphy, > > cfg80211_chandef_usable, cfg80211_secondary_chans_ok) I finally > > realized it was because of: > > IEEE80211_CHAN_NO_80MHZ > > > > Do you have any idea how we could handle such cases nicely? To let > > user find out what's going on (wrong)? > > > > Should "iw" be extended to print flag names? Or should hostapd check > > for channels in some smarter way? Any other ideas? > > We already have the flags exposed to iw, it's just not printing them. > There was a patch to print them, but it wasn't complete, and the > submitter kinda went away. You can see the discussion here: > > http://mid.gmane.org/1425452686-28196-1-git-send-email-arnagara@qti.qualcomm.com Upon rereading, I think my preference would be to remove much of the channel list information and add a separate iw command. johannes