Re: [PATCHv7 2/3] mac80211: add radar detection command/event

[Simon Wunderlich <simon.wunderlich@s2003.tu-chemnitz.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1516 bytes --]

Hey,

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 02:26:42PM +0100, Zefir Kurtisi wrote:
> On 01/29/2013 01:21 PM, Simon Wunderlich wrote:
> > From: Victor Goldenshtein <victorg@ti.com>
> > 
> > [...]
> > @@ -2080,7 +2087,7 @@ enum ieee80211_frame_release_type {
> >   * @IEEE80211_RC_SMPS_CHANGED: The SMPS state of the station changed.
> >   * @IEEE80211_RC_SUPP_RATES_CHANGED: The supported rate set of this peer
> >   *	changed (in IBSS mode) due to discovering more information about
> > - *	the peer.
> > + *	the peern.
> >   */
> typo?

yup ... sorry about that.

> > [...]
> > +	/* TODO: some channels (e.g. ETSI weather channels between 5.600 and
> > +	 * 5.6500 require longer waiting time, if we want to support them at
> > +	 * all.
> > +	 */
> > +	timeout = msecs_to_jiffies(NL80211_DFS_MIN_CAC_TIME_MS);
> > +	ieee80211_queue_delayed_work(&sdata->local->hw,
> > +				     &sdata->dfs_cac_timer_work, timeout);
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> The required minimum detection probability for weather channels is purposely
> defined such that it can't be reached, so it is safe to assume they will never be
> supported. As for CAC and NOP timings, they are luckily same for ETSI and FCC
> right now, and if they differ in the future, we have the countrycode's DFS
> regulatory domain available to differentiate.

Ah ok, good that they are the same :)

I agree about weather channels, 99.9% detection rate just appears not feasible.
Will remove the comment then.

Cheers,
	Simon

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]