2016-05-09 16:21 GMT+02:00 Kalle Valo <[email protected]>: > Arend Van Spriel <[email protected]> writes: >> I did see the patch and noticed the procedural issues as well. However, >> last week was a short week over here and I did not get to it to respond. >> The fix is not done properly. The function determines the RSSI from the >> per-chain values. I suspect that Jaap Jan is using a device which does >> not report per-chain values so his solution should be used as fallback. >> So can you revert the patch so Jaap Jan can rework the patch, ie.: >> >> if (count_rssi) { >> : >> } else if (test_bit(BRCMF_VIF_STATUS_CONNECTED, >> &ifp->vif->sme_state)) { >> memset(&scb_val, 0, sizeof(scb_val)); >> err = brcmf_fil_cmd_data_get(ifp, BRCMF_C_GET_RSSI, >> &scb_val, sizeof(scb_val)); >> if (err) { >> brcmf_err("Could not get rssi (%d)\n", err); >> goto done; >> } else { >> rssi = le32_to_cpu(scb_val.val); >> sinfo->filled |= BIT(NL80211_STA_INFO_SIGNAL); >> sinfo->signal = rssi; >> brcmf_dbg(CONN, "RSSI %d dBm\n", rssi); >> } >> } >>
Thank you for the feedback, I would like to contribute so I'll build a new patch. One more question: I only included the signal strength because I needed it for Android, should I also include Beacon peroid and DTIM period again in this fallback? If so, I would probably need to separate this code in a new fallback method? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
