From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-gw1-out.broadcom.com ([216.31.210.62]:34913 "EHLO mail-gw1-out.broadcom.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757871AbaFYQvT (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jun 2014 12:51:19 -0400 Message-ID: <53AAFDF3.9030707@broadcom.com> (sfid-20140625_185138_509373_0336400C) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 18:50:59 +0200 From: Arend van Spriel MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Johannes Berg CC: "John W. Linville" , Subject: Re: [RFC 2/3] cfg80211: expose cfg80211_disable_40mhz_24ghz module parameter References: <1402996581-10764-1-git-send-email-arend@broadcom.com> <1402996581-10764-3-git-send-email-arend@broadcom.com> <1403516075.4418.9.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <53A9B391.4050602@broadcom.com> <1403711846.4140.16.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> In-Reply-To: <1403711846.4140.16.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 25-06-14 17:57, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Tue, 2014-06-24 at 19:21 +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote: > >>>> + * @wiphy: The wiphy to check. >>>> + * >>>> + * Return: true is 40MHz is disabled in 2.4G band. >>>> + */ >>>> +bool wiphy_is_40mhz_24ghz_disabled(struct wiphy *wiphy); >>> >>> Why should that have a wiphy argument? >> >> It is up to cfg80211 to determine the logic behind the function. It is >> just context supplied by the caller. The fact that it is determined by a >> module parameter is internal cfg80211 stuff. > > I just don't really see any way it would ever be per wiphy? Maybe you are right. By the way, is OBSS support a requirement to do 40MHz in 2.4G? >>> Might also be simpler to just export the variable? >> >> Either way is pretty simple I guess. > > Yeah, dunno. I guess exporting the function at least makes sure nobody > will try to set the variable, so that's somewhat useful... > > I'd prefer to remove the wiphy argument though (and fix the kernel-doc) No problem. Will do. Gr. AvS