On Feb 4, 2008 4:25 PM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Tomas Winkler wrote: > > > I think we should also remove ieee80211_tx_control from > > ieee80211_tx_status. > > Not sure. Where is it used? Let's try, if it's break we won't be in worst situation then now :) > > > Maybe we should add blob to tx_status let say of skb->cb[] size and > > field for rate scale algorithm version/name. Otherwise we will be > > inventing API for each rate scale algorithm... > > I disagree, we should have something generic enough to allow some sort of > "capability negotiation" between the driver and the rate control > algorithm, otherwise we could just remove rate control algorithms > completely and internalize them into drivers (with some "helper" functions > for those who don't want to write their own)... Which I'm sure you might > actually like but I don't ;) So Felix how many rates do you need for each packet? Thanks Tomas > johannes > - 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
