On Thursday 10 July 2008 16:47:57 Tomas Winkler wrote: > On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Johannes Berg > > <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 15:25 +0300, Tomas Winkler wrote: > >> > what about using the generic function to add the radiotap header from > >> > mac80211? it should be flexible enough to handle all devices by now. > >> > >> Why not go ahead. > > > > I always thought you were adding 11n stuff, but if that's not the case > > (and we may make mac80211 do that at some point) then that'd be a nice > > code removal. > > I have never really looked into radio tap so I don't want to make any > statements here. If the 11n part can be done in mac80211 why not. hi! i'm currently working on a patch removing iwl's own radiotap header. while doing that i noticed, that we currently don't have a field in ieee80211_rx_status for the modulation used. for example iwl knows if the frame was demodulated using CCK (RX_RES_PHY_FLAGS_MOD_CCK_MSK), thus it's able to differentiate between B and G modes. in mac80211 we can't do that right now. i guess we could deduct the modulation from the rate 1, 2, 5.5, 11 -> CCK everything else -> OFDM but i'm not sure if this is always true. is there any hardware that also does PBCC? also what about CCK-OFDM modes (b/g interoperability), do we have any way to identify these? what do you think, should we explicitly make a modulation field in rx_status or should we implicitly deduct the modulation from the rates? bruno -- 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
