On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:00:51AM -0800, Luis Rodriguez wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 09:56:48AM -0800, Lukáš Turek wrote:
> > The new attribute NL80211_ATTR_WIPHY_COVERAGE_CLASS sets IEEE 802.11
> > Coverage Class, which depends on maximum distance of nodes in a
> > wireless network. It's required for long distance links (more than a few
> > hundred meters).
> >
> > The attribute is now ignored by two non-mac80211 drivers, rndis and
> > iwmc3200wifi, together with WIPHY_PARAM_RETRY_SHORT and
> > WIPHY_PARAM_RETRY_LONG. If it turns out to be a problem, we could split
> > set_wiphy_params callback or add new capability bits.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lukas Turek <8...@praha12.net>
> > @@ -803,9 +807,16 @@ static int nl80211_set_wiphy(struct sk_buff *skb,
> > struct genl_info *info)
> > changed |= WIPHY_PARAM_RTS_THRESHOLD;
> > }
> >
> > + if (info->attrs[NL80211_ATTR_WIPHY_COVERAGE_CLASS]) {
> > + coverage_class = nla_get_u8(
> > + info->attrs[NL80211_ATTR_WIPHY_COVERAGE_CLASS]);
> > + changed |= WIPHY_PARAM_COVERAGE_CLASS;
> > + }
> > +
>
> Does setting the coverage class make sense for all modes of operation?
>
> If not it'd be good to catch those early and avoid setting them and also
> properly document them.
>
> The AP seems to pass the coverage class on country IE, so I guess
> this means we can support this for AP mode and IBSS and only through the
> country IE for STA.
And if your IBSS and the AP already sent the coverage class through the
country IE I am not sure if we should allow overriding it.
> Mind you that would mean hostapd would need to kick
> the coverage class as well and some new code on cfg80211 reg.c
> country_ie_2_rd() to parse it.
>
> Doesn't seem to make sense to set this for monitor interfaces.
Luis
_______________________________________________
ath5k-devel mailing list
ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org
https://lists.ath5k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath5k-devel
