| Message ID | iwlwifi.20200508170402.c3e50c36c628.I991bfa662c0ef35de5be9eaf5b78ef190b67cb56@changeid (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Delegated to: | Luca Coelho |
| Headers | show |
| Series | iwlwifi: updates intended for v5.8 2020-05-08 | expand |
Does it mean that wireless-regdb is not needed anymore and any vendor can configure wireless stack from it's proprietary firmware? Best Regards, Lukonin Kirill Best Regards, Lukonin Kirill пт, 8 мая 2020 г. в 19:12, Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi>: > > From: Haim Dreyfuss <haim.dreyfuss@intel.com> > > If the firmware's regulatory domain forbids HE operation, set it > in the cfg80211 regdomain. > > Signed-off-by: Haim Dreyfuss <haim.dreyfuss@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com> > --- > drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-nvm-parse.c | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-nvm-parse.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-nvm-parse.c > index d91a8e8349e6..ee410417761d 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-nvm-parse.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-nvm-parse.c > @@ -240,6 +240,7 @@ enum iwl_nvm_channel_flags { > * @REG_CAPA_40MHZ_FORBIDDEN: 11n channel with a width of 40Mhz is forbidden > * for this regulatory domain (valid only in 5Ghz). > * @REG_CAPA_DC_HIGH_ENABLED: DC HIGH allowed. > + * @REG_CAPA_11AX_DISABLED: 11ax is forbidden for this regulatory domain. > */ > enum iwl_reg_capa_flags { > REG_CAPA_BF_CCD_LOW_BAND = BIT(0), > @@ -250,6 +251,7 @@ enum iwl_reg_capa_flags { > REG_CAPA_MCS_9_ALLOWED = BIT(5), > REG_CAPA_40MHZ_FORBIDDEN = BIT(7), > REG_CAPA_DC_HIGH_ENABLED = BIT(9), > + REG_CAPA_11AX_DISABLED = BIT(10), > }; > > static inline void iwl_nvm_print_channel_flags(struct device *dev, u32 level, > @@ -1115,6 +1117,9 @@ static u32 iwl_nvm_get_regdom_bw_flags(const u16 *nvm_chan, > flags |= NL80211_RRF_NO_160MHZ; > } > > + if (cap_flags & REG_CAPA_11AX_DISABLED) > + flags |= NL80211_RRF_NO_HE; > + > return flags; > } > > -- > 2.26.2 >
On Fri, 2020-05-08 at 21:41 +0500, Кирилл Луконин wrote: > Does it mean that wireless-regdb is not needed anymore and any vendor > can configure wireless stack from it's proprietary firmware? This is not new. This is part of the self-managed regulatory feature. -- Cheers, Luca.
Channels ON/OFF logic is OK. But I (and possibly not only me) bought a lot of ax200 cards. And now they all will work in 802.11ac mode without any reason and without any chance to avoid such behavior. That's something new, I think. Best Regards, Lukonin Kirill пт, 8 мая 2020 г. в 22:18, Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi>: > > On Fri, 2020-05-08 at 21:41 +0500, Кирилл Луконин wrote: > > Does it mean that wireless-regdb is not needed anymore and any vendor > > can configure wireless stack from it's proprietary firmware? > > This is not new. This is part of the self-managed regulatory feature. > > -- > Cheers, > Luca. >
On Sat, 2020-05-09 at 01:10 +0500, Кирилл Луконин wrote: > Channels ON/OFF logic is OK. > But I (and possibly not only me) bought a lot of ax200 cards. > And now they all will work in 802.11ac mode without any reason and > without any chance to avoid such behavior. > That's something new, I think. The reason is regulatory. That may be new, but it's just part of following regulations. -- Cheers, Luca.
Yes, it's something new. Because currently there is no any country where 802.11ax is forbidden. May be this change is not so useful or useless at all. Best Regards, Lukonin Kirill Best Regards, Lukonin Kirill сб, 9 мая 2020 г. в 02:13, Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi>: > > On Sat, 2020-05-09 at 01:10 +0500, Кирилл Луконин wrote: > > Channels ON/OFF logic is OK. > > But I (and possibly not only me) bought a lot of ax200 cards. > > And now they all will work in 802.11ac mode without any reason and > > without any chance to avoid such behavior. > > That's something new, I think. > > The reason is regulatory. That may be new, but it's just part of > following regulations. > > -- > Cheers, > Luca. >
Also. If I use two different wi-fi cards from two different vendors (Intel & Qualcomm). Does it mean that Intel ax200 wi-fi card will override Qualcomm HE restrictions? Looks like It's not a good idea to modify system settings because of Intel's restrictions. Other vendors can allow HE operations instead of Intel. Best Regards, Lukonin Kirill сб, 9 мая 2020 г. в 02:13, Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi>: > > On Sat, 2020-05-09 at 01:10 +0500, Кирилл Луконин wrote: > > Channels ON/OFF logic is OK. > > But I (and possibly not only me) bought a lot of ax200 cards. > > And now they all will work in 802.11ac mode without any reason and > > without any chance to avoid such behavior. > > That's something new, I think. > > The reason is regulatory. That may be new, but it's just part of > following regulations. > > -- > Cheers, > Luca. >
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-nvm-parse.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-nvm-parse.c index d91a8e8349e6..ee410417761d 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-nvm-parse.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-nvm-parse.c @@ -240,6 +240,7 @@ enum iwl_nvm_channel_flags { * @REG_CAPA_40MHZ_FORBIDDEN: 11n channel with a width of 40Mhz is forbidden * for this regulatory domain (valid only in 5Ghz). * @REG_CAPA_DC_HIGH_ENABLED: DC HIGH allowed. + * @REG_CAPA_11AX_DISABLED: 11ax is forbidden for this regulatory domain. */ enum iwl_reg_capa_flags { REG_CAPA_BF_CCD_LOW_BAND = BIT(0), @@ -250,6 +251,7 @@ enum iwl_reg_capa_flags { REG_CAPA_MCS_9_ALLOWED = BIT(5), REG_CAPA_40MHZ_FORBIDDEN = BIT(7), REG_CAPA_DC_HIGH_ENABLED = BIT(9), + REG_CAPA_11AX_DISABLED = BIT(10), }; static inline void iwl_nvm_print_channel_flags(struct device *dev, u32 level, @@ -1115,6 +1117,9 @@ static u32 iwl_nvm_get_regdom_bw_flags(const u16 *nvm_chan, flags |= NL80211_RRF_NO_160MHZ; } + if (cap_flags & REG_CAPA_11AX_DISABLED) + flags |= NL80211_RRF_NO_HE; + return flags; }