--- Begin Message ---
- To: submit@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: ath10k locks to regulatory domain US on ACPI platforms
- From: "Rene 'Renne' Bartsch, B.Sc. Informatics" <rene@bartschnet.de>
- Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2019 21:48:17 +0200
- Message-id: <26bce3e4-5e25-29d0-630c-092ed44ad00f@bartschnet.de>
Package: linux-image
Version: 4.19.28-2
The ath10k 802.11 driver reads the country code for the radio regulatory domain from the ACPI table.
If it can't get a valid value it locks to US regulatory domain which is wrong for most countries.
This makes Atheros devices in master mode unusable on ACPI devices in most countries.
Sven Gottschall suggested on ath10k mailing-list to return -EOPNOTSUPP in function
ath10k_mac_get_wrdd_regulatory(struct ath10k *ar, u16 *rd) in file drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c to solve this.
static int ath10k_mac_get_wrdd_regulatory(struct ath10k *ar, u16 *rd)
{
return -EOPNOTSUPP;
}
Regards,
Renne
Kernel version: Linux cloud 4.19.0-4-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.19.28-2 (2019-03-15) x86_64 GNU/Linux
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Control: forwarded -1 https://lore.kernel.org/ath10k/2ab7cc1d-f756-ba3c-64b7-65f8a739a0a6@newmedia-net.de/#t
On Sat, May 29, 2021 at 02:23:22PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2019 at 09:48:17PM +0200, Rene 'Renne' Bartsch, B.Sc. Informatics wrote:
> > Package: linux-image
> > Version: 4.19.28-2
> >
> > The ath10k 802.11 driver reads the country code for the radio regulatory domain from the ACPI table.
> > If it can't get a valid value it locks to US regulatory domain which is wrong for most countries.
> > This makes Atheros devices in master mode unusable on ACPI devices in most countries.
> >
> > Sven Gottschall suggested on ath10k mailing-list to return -EOPNOTSUPP in function
> > ath10k_mac_get_wrdd_regulatory(struct ath10k *ar, u16 *rd) in file drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c to solve this.
> >
> >
> > static int ath10k_mac_get_wrdd_regulatory(struct ath10k *ar, u16 *rd)
> > {
> > return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > }
>
> Was there a conclusion upstream?
As this looks is not going to change in upstream, I'm closing this
downstream bug about it as well.
Regards,
Salvatore
--- End Message ---