From owner-freebsd-wireless@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 24 13:15:16 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB185587 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 13:15:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wi0-x230.google.com (mail-wi0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 560212F38 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 13:15:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f176.google.com with SMTP id ey16so4263597wid.3 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:15:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=r7jGJJx57ZTvlizgPBAFT191o0yTMdHv5jSbQh4gXlI=; b=IeH+0YAhPKDc8Gm54qh7KkT+GClbEeJsz0rwG66LLKqJ3bpYDKhAmeWZvCA6OIb4aZ FXq2fZNLfnsDpgmx2t4xM6BuCtzAH+XLEp7vGndzoaCRHSKjA9RVUtIEP5bf45awtuUZ ebR2bdNPSZPO5JLcjxSj3vxmlaIY89KXhRrODaWpnteG02PZqPpDNZPiL/ISvhl/DRpz voySJqOZEJJRj1vSweh9Zhi8VDQTRlHQCqbaqzQCxw3ut6My3SFCilhLbjozPrgNsyPC HhSz1As3j9EEXp00+xxsNkNk6ahupjkfyLYPU4Sdsy62N3CcPiQGcVwyZZPM3Y+RRJ3F APug== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.92.6 with SMTP id ci6mr2741131wjb.79.1374671714729; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:15:14 -0700 (PDT) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.217.94.132 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:15:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 06:15:14 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: VA8fJUIRq0SGvEG_F2lOItLdTO4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Chenchong's work on net80211_ratectl From: Adrian Chadd To: Chenchong Qin Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussions of 802.11 stack, tools device driver development." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 13:15:16 -0000 cool! Would you mind posting an updated diff? -adrian On 24 July 2013 01:39, Chenchong Qin 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 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 > >