Re: [PATCH v5] cfg80211: save power spectral density(psd) of regulatory rule

[Wen Gong <wgong@codeaurora.org>]

Hi Johannes,

Are you waiting for the AP/STA concurrency patches, then apply this 
patch?

On 2021-11-09 17:57, Wen Gong wrote:
> Hi Johannes,
> 
> do you have comments about my description for PSD?
> 
> On 2021-10-26 19:26, Wen Gong wrote:
>> On 2021-10-26 04:09, Johannes Berg wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2021-10-11 at 15:48 +0800, Wen Gong wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> > IMO, Only power rules and PSD info might vary for AP and STATION. Rest
>>>> > of the rules will remains same right?
>>>> >
>>>> The freq_range may also be different for AP and STATION.
>>>> and reg_rules number also may also be different for AP and STATION.
>>>> 
>>>> for example:
>>>> SUBORDINATE CLIENT of STANDARD POWER reg rules number 2
>>>> reg rule 1: (5945 - 6425 @ 160) (0, 30) (FLAGS 0) (psd flag 1 EIRP 
>>>> 17
>>>> dB/MHz)
>>>> reg rule 2: (6525 - 6885 @ 160) (0, 30) (FLAGS 0) (psd flag 1 EIRP 
>>>> 17
>>>> dB/MHz)
>>>> 
>>>> INDOOR AP reg rules number 1
>>>> reg rule 1: (5945 - 7125 @ 160) (0, 24) (FLAGS 0) (psd flag 0 EIRP 0
>>>> dB/MHz)
>>> 
>>> That seems right, but isn't that an orthogonal question?
>>> 
>>> Here, on this patch, we're discussing what data we should have in the
>>> channel information, and it would seem that if it's different for
>>> AP/client, then we do need both information stored, so that we can 
>>> cope
>>> with concurrency between AP and client?
>>> 
>>> If we additionally need to have different data for the regulatory 
>>> rules
>>> for AP and client, that might mean we need to go back and actually
>>> change the code there *as well*, and then fill in the right fields in
>>> this patch?
>>> 
>>> Unless somehow we're convinced that for this feature we don't need to
>>> worry about concurrently using AP and client modes?
>>> 
>>> johannes
>> 
>> Currently these patches of mac80211/cfg80211/ieee80211 for LPI/SP/VLP 
>> is
>> the base patches, to enable the feature of LPI/SP/VLP, it still need 
>> other
>> patches of lower drivers such as ath11k to enable it. It will not have
>> LPI/SP/VLP without patches of ath11k, it means all these patches will
>> not take effect.
>> 
>> When lower driver such as ath11k set max_interfaces of
>> ieee80211_iface_combination
>> to 1, then it can not start more than 1 interface on the same
>> ieee80211_hw/wiphy.
>> When STATION interface is up, then AP interface can not start up. AP 
>> interface
>> can start up after STATION interfacedown. Also when AP interface is 
>> up,
>> STATION interface can not start up. STATION interface can start up 
>> after
>> AP interface down.
>> 
>> I have sent out my ath11k
>> patches(https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/20211026111913.7346-1-quic_wgong@quicinc.com/),
>> it will allow only one interface
>> up simultaneously for the chip which enable LPI/SP/VLP feature in this
>> patch: "ath11k: allow only one interface up simultaneously for 
>> WCN6855"
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/20211026111913.7346-5-quic_wgong@quicinc.com/
>> It means it will not have both AP/STA together and these patches of 
>> mac80211/
>> cfg80211/ieee80211 not need changes and it will not have bugs.
>> 
>> If there are some chip want to both enable LPI/SP/VLP feature and
>> enable AP/STA simultaneously in same ieee80211_hw/wiphy in future,
>> then he/she need to refine reg rules and channels of 
>> mac80211/cfg80211/
>> ieee80211, but at that moment, this patch "cfg80211: save power
>> spectral density(psd) of regulatory rule" still not need change.
>> Because this patch is change in each reg rule/each channel in a
>> low layer, the refine reg rules and channels is a high layer, they
>> have no intersection.