On 5/16/2025 1:21 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Wed, 2025-05-14 at 16:58 +0530, Raj Kumar Bhagat wrote:
>>
>> +int cfg80211_get_radio_idx_by_chan(struct wiphy *wiphy,
>> + const struct ieee80211_channel *chan)
>> +{
>> + const struct wiphy_radio *radio;
>> + int i, j;
>> + u32 freq;
>> +
>> + if (!chan)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + freq = ieee80211_channel_to_khz(chan);
>> + for (i = 0; i < wiphy->n_radio; i++) {
>> + radio = &wiphy->radio[i];
>> + for (j = 0; j < radio->n_freq_range; j++) {
>> + if (freq >= radio->freq_range[j].start_freq &&
>> + freq <= radio->freq_range[j].end_freq)
>> + return i;
>>
>
> I believe we also discussed this in the past elsewhere, but I don't
> think the the >= and <= can simultaneously be wrong. If the frequency
> ranges for radios are adjacent, then the intervals here need to be half
> open. I _think_ it should be < instead of <=, and therefore a half-open
> interval of "[start, end[" (or "[start, end)" depending on your
> preferred notation.)
>
Sure, will use half-open interval ([start, end[) in next version.
