On Tue, 2007-09-11 at 12:20 +0200, Michael Buesch wrote: > What about the following: > We have a "the packet failed" IRQ. so we know that if that didn't > raise for a packet, it must have succeed. > So currently we already maintain a queue of TX packets. What about > changing the handling of this queue? Instead of dropping (and > telling mac80211 success) on an ACK RX, simply do a timeout. > We can calculate the time (plus some additional msecs to be sure) > by when an ACK must have arrived, no? That's tricky though, because multiple retry rates mean that it can possibly take quite a while for the packet to go through. And ath5k wants to support up to 7 different rates for each packet. > So, if that times out, > signal a success. Wouldn't that be reliable? Given that the "tx failed" > IRQ actually _is_ reliable. Yeah, and in-order would have to be guaranteed as well so we can match which packet failed and assume all previous ones were OK. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
