Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:15:14 -0700 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: Chenchong Qin <qinchenchong@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Chenchong's work on net80211_ratectl Message-ID: <CAJ-Vmo=k8NddAYyAJCkx4eOaA_8XsSxg6uKrdddx%2BgmeT%2BX9KA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAFnsE3cyg=msBfQqqKUMmLABSL=j24VoMBwbBjxQ6b7Dyy7Mqg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAFnsE3dYdPf5yGTFH683Q1Zh0mc-g%2B_YtCTraNNt28z2vBoSKw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-Vmom4sY7jcNwWmJkrDwfWjsok2fk8UEwTi5A=egj1JyerLw@mail.gmail.com> <CAFnsE3cyg=msBfQqqKUMmLABSL=j24VoMBwbBjxQ6b7Dyy7Mqg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
cool! Would you mind posting an updated diff? -adrian On 24 July 2013 01:39, Chenchong Qin <qinchenchong@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi! > > Thanks for your constructive feedback! > > First, I've done some renaming things. IEEE80211_RATECTL_OPT_* became > IEEE80211_RATECTL_CAP_* and options in ieee80211_ratectl became > ir_capabilities. > > As for max4msframelen , I re-added this field and also ported > ath_max_4ms_framelen[4][32] to ieee80211_ratectl. > > An error is also corrected (about initialization of ir_capabilities). > > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:30 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote: >> >> >> * Why do you have IEEE80211_RATECTL_OPT_MULTXCHAIN ? > > > IEEE80211_RATECTL_OPT_MULTXCHAIN is used in ieee80211_ratectl_hascap_stbc() > to assist the determination of whether we can enable STBC. > >> * The reason why I check both the vap/ic and the node bits for HT >> capabilities is that they're negotiated. The node bits are what the >> remote peer supports. The vap/ic bits are what the local device/vap >> supports. So, if the remote node supports STBC and the local node >> doesn't, we shouldn't try transmitting short-GI. > > > uh... I also do the "double check" stuff. Do the ieee80211_ratectl_hascap_* > functions do > wrong things? And, I'm not very clear about the relation between STBC and > short-GI now. > It seems that I need some further reading. :) > >> >> * In ieee80211_ratectl_complete_rcflags(), enabling RTS/CTS but not >> transmitting an 11n rate isn't "right." The 11n hardware supports >> per-rate RTS/CTS for non-HT rates. You have to ensure that works. >> You've added a capability bit for this (IEEE80211_RATECTL_OPT_MRRPROT) >> so you should use it. > > > Yeah... here my logic messed up. It's corrected. > >> >> * the new rate field "options" should be "ir_options", like how the >> rest of the fields are prefixed with ir_ >> * .. and, nitpicking, it should be "ir_capabilities". >> > > It's already done. > > > Thanks! > > Chenchong > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-Vmo=k8NddAYyAJCkx4eOaA_8XsSxg6uKrdddx%2BgmeT%2BX9KA>