From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean Tourrilhes Subject: Re: proposal for new wireless configuration API Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 12:39:38 -0700 Message-ID: <20060817193938.GA29676@bougret.hpl.hp.com> References: <1155655728.17742.30.camel@ux156> <200608151838.58182.mb@bu3sch.de> <1155665688.8940.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200608152113.23697.mb@bu3sch.de> Reply-To: jt@hpl.hp.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Dan Williams , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Berg Return-path: Received: from gundega.hpl.hp.com ([192.6.19.190]:14806 "EHLO gundega.hpl.hp.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751266AbWHQTla (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Aug 2006 15:41:30 -0400 To: Michael Buesch Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200608152113.23697.mb@bu3sch.de> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 09:13:23PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote: > On Tuesday 15 August 2006 20:14, Dan Williams wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 18:38 +0200, Michael Buesch wrote: > > > On Tuesday 15 August 2006 18:29, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > o Separate attributes for channel and frequency > > > > > > No, channel and freq is the same. It's just another name > > > for the same child. I would say we only want to deal with channel numbers > > > in the API. That's much easier, as we don't have to deal with this > > > fixed-point (or even floating point) mess. Look at WE for the > > > fixed-point mess. > > > > Right, I don't have a problem with only using one or the other; but we > > _HAVE_ to provide a function in the driver that allows userspace > > programs to convert channel <-> frequency both ways, like you suggest > > below. Obviously the channel/frequency mapping isn't the same > > everywhere. > > > > [ or is it? I'd be very uncomfortable using the same channel #s > > everywhere unless some IEEE spec states exactly what the channel #s are > > for every frequency range that wireless stuff operates in ] > > The channel<->freq mapping is stable. We may need to double check this... It is already clear that WiMax, ZigBee and pre-802.11 HW don't use the same channel<->freq mapping as 802.11. Further, I remember somebody (was it Jouni) mentioning that some variations of 802.11 have different channel mappings. But, we would need to check that. > > No argument here; as long as we provide the mapping function in the > > driver for each card. > > Hm, I don't know if I understand this correctly. > You want to implement the mapping function in every driver > or in the d80211 stack? A simple mapping table is probably enough, similar to what we already have. Jean