On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:56:32 +0100 Mattias Nissler <mattias.nissler@xxxxxx> wrote: > Sometimes, the stack sends frames at different rates than what was > decided by the rate control algorithm (there are several situations in > which this can happen, e.g. an AP only allowing 802.11b rates, rts/cts No, wait, to consider rts/cts frames makes sense here, but I'd say that the same doesn't apply to AP only allowing 802.11b rates, because anyway non-CCK rates would get excluded from supported rates, and we wouldn't even map them. > frames, maybe more). But still, the tx status is reported back to the > rate control algorithm as for normal frames. Now the rate control > algorithm just doesn't care and accounts the tx status to the wrong > rate. This is clearly suboptimal. I cannot estimate how much impact this > behaviour has. However, it shouldn't be hard to improve the situation > either by reporting back to the rate control algorithm on which rate the > frame handed to tx_status() was actually transmitted, so it can decide > itself what to do about this (this is my preferred solution). Or you > could just have the stack don't call tx_status() for frames that were > transmitted on another rate. Ok, got it. But I would just discard them, I can't think of any significant measurement on those frames. So I would follow the second approach here. Or do you have any suggestions on how to consider those frames? -- Ciao Stefano - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
