Re: [ath9k-devel] [PATCH v2 7/8] cfg80211: Add Kconfig option for ITS-G5 band (5.9 GHz)
On Fri, Nov 27 2015, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2015-11-26 at 22:10 +0100, Michal Sojka wrote: >> >> Because in [1] Jouni said that >> >> "kernel config option + custom regdb would certainly be much >> closer to what I'd like to see from the regulatory enforcement view >> point" >> >> I also like the fact that the help text mentions the relevant >> regulatory documents. I guess the users would appreciate that. >> > > Fair enough, but I'm not really convinced that the Kconfig option is > needed for what Jouni really required. > > In any case, I spoke with him yesterday and we don't think that your > patches are going to work as is - we'll need to change the regulatory > flags it seems. I'll comment more specifically on the patches. OK. I'll wait for that. -Michal ___ ath9k-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
Re: [ath9k-devel] [PATCH v2 7/8] cfg80211: Add Kconfig option for ITS-G5 band (5.9 GHz)
On Thu, Nov 26 2015, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Mon, 2015-11-23 at 19:27 +0100, Michal Sojka wrote: >> This option is meant for use by drivers and other subsystems to >> enable >> support for the Intelligent Transportation System (ITS-G5) band. The >> option depends on CFG80211_CERTIFICATION_ONUS as the use of this band >> is >> restricted. EU allows using it only for certain applications, USA >> require certification. > > Hm. Why do we need this now? I see that you're checking it in ath9k, to > enable the "ITSG5" channels, but why wouldn't you always do that, now > that you have the extra checks with the user regdb being required and > all? Because in [1] Jouni said that "kernel config option + custom regdb would certainly be much closer to what I'd like to see from the regulatory enforcement view point" I also like the fact that the help text mentions the relevant regulatory documents. I guess the users would appreciate that. -Michal [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg13795.html ___ ath9k-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
Re: [ath9k-devel] [PATCH v2 7/8] cfg80211: Add Kconfig option for ITS-G5 band (5.9 GHz)
On Thu, 2015-11-26 at 22:10 +0100, Michal Sojka wrote: > > Because in [1] Jouni said that > > "kernel config option + custom regdb would certainly be much > closer to what I'd like to see from the regulatory enforcement view > point" > > I also like the fact that the help text mentions the relevant > regulatory documents. I guess the users would appreciate that. > Fair enough, but I'm not really convinced that the Kconfig option is needed for what Jouni really required. In any case, I spoke with him yesterday and we don't think that your patches are going to work as is - we'll need to change the regulatory flags it seems. I'll comment more specifically on the patches. johannes ___ ath9k-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
Re: [ath9k-devel] [PATCH v2 7/8] cfg80211: Add Kconfig option for ITS-G5 band (5.9 GHz)
On Mon, 2015-11-23 at 19:27 +0100, Michal Sojka wrote: > This option is meant for use by drivers and other subsystems to > enable > support for the Intelligent Transportation System (ITS-G5) band. The > option depends on CFG80211_CERTIFICATION_ONUS as the use of this band > is > restricted. EU allows using it only for certain applications, USA > require certification. Hm. Why do we need this now? I see that you're checking it in ath9k, to enable the "ITSG5" channels, but why wouldn't you always do that, now that you have the extra checks with the user regdb being required and all? johannes ___ ath9k-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
