From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EDE0C00A89 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 08:36:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0634320739 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 08:36:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mg.codeaurora.org header.i=@mg.codeaurora.org header.b="HvvS1oAk" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726400AbgKEIgH (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Nov 2020 03:36:07 -0500 Received: from m42-4.mailgun.net ([69.72.42.4]:28883 "EHLO m42-4.mailgun.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725287AbgKEIgH (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Nov 2020 03:36:07 -0500 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mg.codeaurora.org; q=dns/txt; s=smtp; t=1604565366; h=Content-Type: MIME-Version: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Date: References: Subject: Cc: To: From: Sender; bh=hZ5mEVv0/kXvZfDCQAmTT/elJmLdNkZVpazrrI4COQc=; b=HvvS1oAkNCuFUHoE5QzPSy9FTsYQEYt240nPBHo81iQCoD7XsyYJ72hshz//qMnx6DYD3wyU KzFBILXj44ke4W8NS2JpcIn44LSlCjuJhPa8cFwEq/Zi63cCuCrsRnfGRGQ9jcbF9fYDIsKP 30qGDI2YPiSopJFAM3TEAdSaVdE= X-Mailgun-Sending-Ip: 69.72.42.4 X-Mailgun-Sid: WyI3YTAwOSIsICJsaW51eC13aXJlbGVzc0B2Z2VyLmtlcm5lbC5vcmciLCAiYmU5ZTRhIl0= Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org (ec2-35-166-182-171.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.166.182.171]) by smtp-out-n01.prod.us-east-1.postgun.com with SMTP id 5fa3b972550ef6ef19ba5666 (version=TLS1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256); Thu, 05 Nov 2020 08:36:02 GMT Sender: kvalo=codeaurora.org@mg.codeaurora.org Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id BA772C433CB; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 08:36:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from potku.adurom.net (88-114-240-156.elisa-laajakaista.fi [88.114.240.156]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: kvalo) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 21C0AC433C6; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 08:35:58 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 21C0AC433C6 Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kvalo@codeaurora.org From: Kalle Valo To: Brian Norris Cc: Carl Huang , Abhishek Kumar , linux-wireless , ath11k@lists.infradead.org, ath10k , Doug Anderson Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] nl80211: add common API to configure SAR power limitations. References: <1600753017-4614-1-git-send-email-cjhuang@codeaurora.org> Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 10:35:56 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Brian Norris's message of "Wed, 4 Nov 2020 09:44:55 -0800") Message-ID: <877dr0nqtv.fsf@codeaurora.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Brian Norris writes: > + ath10k > > [ I realize I replied to the "wrong" RFC v1; I fell trap to Kalle's note: > > "When you submit a new version mark it as "v2". Otherwise people don't > know what's the latest version." ] > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 11:32 PM Carl Huang wrote: >> On 2020-11-04 10:00, Brian Norris wrote: >> > What are the ABI guarantees around a given driver/chip's 'sar_capa'? >> > Do we guarantee that if the driver supports N ranges of certain bands, >> > that it will always continue to support those bands? > ... >> For a given chip(at least a QCOM chip), we don't see that the >> range will grow or change. > > That's good to know. But that's not quite the same as an ABI guarantee. I'm not sure if I understood Brian's question correctly, but I have concerns on the assumption that frequency ranges never change. For example, in ath10k we have a patch[1] under discussion which adds more channels and in ath11k we added 6 GHz band after initial ath11k support landed. And I would not be surprised if in some boards/platforms a certain band is disabled due to cotting costs (no antenna etc). My preference is to have a robust interface which would be designed to handle these kind of changes. [1] [PATCH] ath10k: enable advertising support for channels 32, 68 and 98 -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches