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
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
