On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 11:32:02PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > I'm not sure this is worth it. While putting this into the WiPHY device > creates more logic there, putting knowledge like 'how many different > channels can this WiPHY device support' etc. into some representation > that can be used by the stack to decide is much more trouble than it is > worth. Do you mean 'simultaneous' channel operation, or something more mundane like simply 'what frequencies can I run on'? If you're talking about the former.. things get quite complicated, but that could be handled by having two WiPHY devices registered. As for the latter, when you factor in the needs of 802.11d and its dependents (802.11j, 802.11k, and others) the stack is going to need to be aware of the available channel sets; both in the sense of hardware support and also the various regulatory requirements. The hardware knows what frequencies it supports. Unfortunately this has to be a somewhat dynamic thing, as this is often not queryable until the device firmware is up and running. This can be accomplished by passing a static table to the register_wiphy_device() call (or perhaps via a struct wiphy_dev parameter) or through a more explicit, dynamic interface like: wiphy_register_supported_frequency(hw, 2412). - Solomon -- Solomon Peachy ICQ: 1318344 Melbourne, FL Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Attachment:
pgpKNeE3LKuuw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: wireless: recap of current issues (configuration)
- From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>
- Re: wireless: recap of current issues (configuration)
- From: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
- Re: wireless: recap of current issues (configuration)
- References:
- wireless: recap of current issues (intro)
- From: "John W. Linville" <[email protected]>
- wireless: recap of current issues (configuration)
- From: "John W. Linville" <[email protected]>
- Re: wireless: recap of current issues (configuration)
- From: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
- wireless: recap of current issues (intro)
- Prev by Date: RE: Dual core Athlons and unsynced TSCs
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 2.6.15] ia64: use i386 dmi_scan.c
- Previous by thread: Re: wireless: recap of current issues (configuration)
- Next by thread: Re: wireless: recap of current issues (configuration)
- Index(es):