From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Fri Apr 2 05:03:05 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFE155C1B2C; Fri, 2 Apr 2021 05:03:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 1051244836@qq.com) Received: from qq.com (out162-62-57-64.mail.qq.com [162.62.57.64]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FBSc451ljz3pHc; Fri, 2 Apr 2021 05:03:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 1051244836@qq.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=qq.com; s=s201512; t=1617339771; bh=Tdn676cO432eqNw3+/hgDQbi7Ki5kuiQJ4t0kxfbF3I=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=n49fs5o+3Agc22YJbnShb0Le9+QGChjIA7SjfP6/GnhQnLKu/i/JyWHx5wv4Oul0o PojlY/tmdj13vCGBHjp/V+2Y6FZjU52N0qebP+A8tHuUqJVEd4ATVbiF0ttmH6GzJJ s+XwgkvgHhni0BsbXFfbmq0sVwZG48lm2ljkg8zE= Received: from [192.168.3.157] ([116.199.115.143]) by newxmesmtplogicsvrszb7.qq.com (NewEsmtp) with SMTP id 6BA3ED8; Fri, 02 Apr 2021 13:01:43 +0800 X-QQ-mid: xmsmtpt1617339703t4eumu1dg Message-ID: X-QQ-XMAILINFO: N4iFWxuWa2tyAou5aHnDCRFoglN2JwZK79FL8fmIOEBeDei09GRmg7ef1t7V2m uxuhYutbtzaKVZuYB1jpc/Kh4Y6VelU1vYka+J6PCH/53XRLqs1wUxqDWnA0LczqFVlPG12/sZUW 2se+9seXcnjO20k3AsCnB0sR/JVbBlTunbw8FB6WfHpSfg4+SiwO2/qzcykWQyrm/h6owGZiPS31 gYsmfsjGn8aiZLtjYPU/I/loqcWedoOXDnsFwfRrjeYMm6rzx3ira45/K0upa6At8e2Ty/WYGwMU fzSAyCevkwGFgdpIlDzBwjmmRr8LEs1rnJ8dEwoKQXcrQLEJDm+IY1rzggAu8LfEYOc+2UQkl8W8 LD7ijXepJK+Eets6zWOeP+aSzXeYjeo7aRDGgSrhviPM2HkFhh7SuveFDTQKZhMh3UbtM904sIu4 FI3TLQuNr20UARljZRCQzpKetDp37UKlRIEx+IspC22q01tnwri95QiOcsac7rEBF5xP5ObQgktP uz0da8P7jeTGLkvLGmGTVIdZKZIm5vbZ7eXHNu5oIa90Oqxp9foNrDxkFJ/bAK6ODdKyob81julc iQeMirm76f0OqptFzbjhwjReCnPlojcrAZmUgZf9Ljpw9x4JriQ600BtMvj9BRL0EeVhfi/OX7ac 6pz+x12eqzjp279XdfllWaa4fcUJQnRlsDm8oXZeTrFGELfRn8CPkHQoDekyhusWG3N6SzMfy0Tt L2w3DDLPvj0Wpy/dinY77fUa7iVbjN2hYmTc5Labx6Sf9b12/1IHyAMXCHvnjCdQpMv9RjA7VJZB s= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Subject: Re: Correct net80211 channel flag. From: qcwap <1051244836@qq.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2021 13:01:43 +0800 Cc: freebsd-wireless , freebsd-current Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OQ-MSGID: <93EC7CD8-1D58-4723-9DF3-E3DCD27CB374@qq.com> References: To: Adrian Chadd X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4FBSc451ljz3pHc X-Spamd-Bar: ------ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=qq.com header.s=s201512 header.b=n49fs5o+; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=qq.com; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of 1051244836@qq.com designates 162.62.57.64 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=1051244836@qq.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.50 / 15.00]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[qq.com]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:162.62.57.64]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[qq.com:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[qq.com,none]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[qq.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:132203, ipnet:162.62.56.0/22, country:CN]; RBL_DBL_DONT_QUERY_IPS(0.00)[162.62.57.64:from]; DWL_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[qq.com:dkim]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[qq.com:s=s201512]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; SPAMHAUS_ZRD(0.00)[162.62.57.64:from:127.0.2.255]; WHITELIST_SPF_DKIM(-3.00)[qq.com:d:+,qq.com:s:+]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-wireless,freebsd-current] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2021 05:03:05 -0000 Got it, thank you. zxystd > 2021=E5=B9=B44=E6=9C=882=E6=97=A5 =E4=B8=8B=E5=8D=8812:56=EF=BC=8CAdrian= Chadd =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A >=20 > Hi! >=20 > Oh, so from what I recall, implementations got it wrong in the early > draft days with their interop so the flag values changed. >=20 >=20 > -adrian >=20 > On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 20:45, qcwap <1051244836@qq.com> wrote: >>=20 >> Well, I see. >>=20 >> I am newly to freebsd, thanks for your answering. >> I had tried using this section of code and found these flags are not = satisfied, after changing them, I can negotiate VHT80, VHT160 fine with = iwm, so I pointed out this problem. I am also wondering what's the badly = wrong of you said in draft VHT implementation? >>=20 >> thanks >> zxystd >>=20 >>> 2021=E5=B9=B43=E6=9C=8830=E6=97=A5 =E4=B8=8A=E5=8D=881:26=EF=BC=8CAdri= an Chadd =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A >>>=20 >>> hm! >>>=20 >>> On Mon, 29 Mar 2021 at 08:02, qcwap <1051244836@qq.com> wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> This patch corrects ieee80211_vht_get_vhtcap_ie for 160/80P80 = channel width recognition. >>>>=20 >>>> diff --git a/sys/net80211/ieee80211.h b/sys/net80211/ieee80211.h >>>> index 86ab1459cca..76c43629b33 100644 >>>> --- a/sys/net80211/ieee80211.h >>>> +++ b/sys/net80211/ieee80211.h >>>> @@ -811,9 +811,9 @@ struct ieee80211_ie_vht_operation { >>>> #define IEEE80211_VHTCAP_SUPP_CHAN_WIDTH_MASK 0x0000000C >>>> #define IEEE80211_VHTCAP_SUPP_CHAN_WIDTH_MASK_S 2 >>>> #define IEEE80211_VHTCAP_SUPP_CHAN_WIDTH_NONE 0 >>>> -#define IEEE80211_VHTCAP_SUPP_CHAN_WIDTH_160MHZ 1 >>>> -#define IEEE80211_VHTCAP_SUPP_CHAN_WIDTH_160_80P80MHZ 2 >>>> -#define IEEE80211_VHTCAP_SUPP_CHAN_WIDTH_RESERVED 3 >>>> +#define IEEE80211_VHTCAP_SUPP_CHAN_WIDTH_160MHZ 4 >>>> +#define IEEE80211_VHTCAP_SUPP_CHAN_WIDTH_160_80P80MHZ 8 >>>> +#define IEEE80211_VHTCAP_SUPP_CHAN_WIDTH_RESERVED 16 >>>>=20 >>>> #define IEEE80211_VHTCAP_SUPP_CHAN_WIDTH_IS_160MHZ(_vhtcaps) = \ >>>> (_IEEE80211_MASKSHIFT(_vhtcaps, = IEEE80211_VHTCAP_SUPP_CHAN_WIDTH_MASK) >=3D \ >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> This is the flag change from the draft 11ac spec to the released = 11ac >>> spec, right? >>>=20 >>> I remember they needed to change the flags because existing draft >>> implementations got the 80+80/160MHz negotiation really badly wrong = in >>> some interop places... >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> -adrian >>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list >>>> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to = "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >>>=20 >>=20 >=20