From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=95.215.58.220 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1794749827; b=xk2It47daXiunQK72/N03EBw+NOy5dW8ugNurc5f9AqeoaoIJfhaTll4vVs1AoMMeOPF N3y7cn23eFDQRiH+ADn1bIIAlaSGcdwGzxFpEYI6azYZ5Rh/TBJ/XKKwzde66aKGBFvhh BkNJfTpud+1LLHjFlOqSncm5BqfSE485X5RvDrns4QLD4j8iiee9pXrMjCpOXYxPfK3z/ OxbnAC918YQC9Yu8O/LNQQJsnIwDjpIna3tmp7Wec6lOs88sP5XrwKciDa04h0BpvCIM5 lWYEZgq2YA0DDUcCm3bDcx+dsfzI8HPSqpErzzwaTM9bjjqSlSWzgTUslBaLfTRUfvQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1794749827; h=DMARC-Filter:X-Envelope-To:DKIM-Signature:X-Envelope-To:Received: X-Mizu-Trace-ID:X-Migadu-Flow:Date:From:To:CC:Subject:In-Reply-To: References:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=ZjUnR6+QZE32A9/LkuFUZch6nPwUQMRTjQvKArmo6yw=; b=cfmu8gnoMhx5yC1+o+Fbx8s3QLbqV/5JBRia6/4wiQNBcfhCCT2pEZf8cgYRtI9MZgqH WuqHnS63haPXpkq46GIivy/RfQsySSTJalUtjv+MYwjd2r4gbc4u0Ogf5man3XLOpMPVJ cpdQMFsA7QhaJwR5wmkzWxi5c5H9E+O2Id0itS2YnnFUDAIBXI9SavFS+Ijj7eb2yF7jz MPwr3O+VHZF2Y0w3wDXFb6cnmLjLT0ywVnNJyU576qH/LOm7gyZEN06GplslPNOXvsNdB 3vAW4PtpdF9Im0wbPG1SQW9c101Ob1q/aV50TpGn2CGypgV38zM5ffNIp24LS6iKNBw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=key1 header.b=loMOBnUl; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=95.215.58.220 Received: from mta1.migadu.com (out-220.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.220]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E139D606A32F for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2026 13:37:06 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org E139D606A32F Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=key1 header.b=loMOBnUl X-Envelope-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=ZjUnR6+QZE32A9/LkuFUZch6nPwUQMRTjQvKArmo6yw=; c=simple/simple; d=linux.dev; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=key1; t=1794749823; v=1; x=1795354623; b=loMOBnUlGAnQX95XrWH9zMUwvlH9+LXJN3Caqh/yxJkpPCND8kw6xhUZUl5RBpgPODpLXYwx S4n1ub03UP7kUtASXIVfj5q+AS+VIiX6PlCoBoLo1U8S1jqUvfjZE36TlI19QuZd1qq77UsDZry AJd/TGnNdxCg1Ao3QcOSo2cg= X-Envelope-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Received: by smtp.migadu.com with ESMTPS id 34ee1f0318fc7712; Sun, 15 Nov 2026 13:37:03 +0000 X-Mizu-Trace-ID: 34ee1f0318fc7712 X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2026 14:36:58 +0100 From: Luka Gejak To: Ho Jie Feng , Ping-Ke Shih CC: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bitterblue Smith Subject: =?US-ASCII?Q?Re=3A_=5BPATCH_rtw-next_v4_3/7=5D_wifi=3A_rtw88=3A?= =?US-ASCII?Q?_correctly_expose_beamformee_capabilities?= In-Reply-To: <20261115114336.1739863-4-hjf3108@gmail.com> References: <20261115114336.1739863-1-hjf3108@gmail.com> <20261115114336.1739863-4-hjf3108@gmail.com> Message-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit One more thing for this patch. On November 15, 2026 12:43:29 PM GMT+01:00, Ho Jie Feng wrote: > Make MU and SU capability flags each depend on the chip declared > maximum instead of setting both flags together. Could you also describe the problem with the old advertisement? As far as I can see, both SU and MU beamformee flags were set regardless of the chip limits. Explaining why they need separate checks would make the reason for the change clearer. I think the new support_bf check is worth mentioning too, once the runtime behavior from my earlier reply is settled. Best regards, Luka Gejak