On 2013-03-17 10:23 PM, Karl Beldan wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 04:36:58PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
>> On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 10:41 +0100, Karl Beldan wrote:
>> > On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:51:08AM +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>> > > When MCS rates start to get bad in 2.4 GHz because of long range or
>> > > strong interference, CCK rates can be a lot more robust.
>> > >
>> > > This patch adds a pseudo MCS group containing CCK rates (long preamble
>> > > in the lower 4 slots, short preamble in the upper slots).
>> > >
>> > With this, mac80211 might send CCK rates with IEEE80211_TX_CTL_AMPDU set.
>> > For aggregates, if we don't currently set NO_CCK, at the very least the
>> > 1st rate index should belong to an MCS_GROUP.
>>
>> I guess that depends on how you expect rate control to work ... I'd
>> kinda expect the driver to skip aggregation then? I think only ath9k
>> even uses minstrel + aggregation?
>>
>
> This changes the meaning of IEEE80211_TX_CTL_AMPDU.
> With this there are more possible RC feedback pitfalls with the tx statuses
> IEEE80211_TX_{CTL,STAT}_AMPDU flags.
> Regarding the drivers using minstrel + aggregation I can't really say, I
> know ath9k runs ok with it and at work I settled for minstrel too with a
> driver for our IP on a demo board.
It's important that the IEEE80211_TX_CTL_AMPDU flag is still set,
because the frame is still part of the BlockAck window, just sent with a
rate that doesn't allow aggregating it with other frames, so it is still
part of the A-MPDU session.
If there are any drivers that cannot easily be changed to support that,
we should have an explicit flag to disable using CCK with 802.11n stations.
- Felix
--
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
