On Fri, 2008-09-19 at 11:54 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Fri, 2008-09-19 at 11:46 +0200, Mattias Nissler wrote: > > > This brings up the question whether we can do without tx status > > reporting. Does anyone know why hostapd requires the tx status? As far > > as I understand, mac80211 only uses the tx status reporting only for the > > tx rate control. Rate control algos that don't use tx status are > > definitely feasible (and in fact we'll need one for rt73). > > mac80211 also uses it for reporting the sent frame to userspace on > monitor interfaces. Yeah, that's what hostapd relies on. But mac80211 really does not care to much how userspace uses the information. > > > I'll look into hostapd to figure out whether the tx status reporting is > > really required when I find some time. > > hostapd requires this because it needs to know whether a station > acknowledged a frame or not to proceed its state machine, it's just how > it has to work. If the hardware can't deal with that I guess you can't > implement AP mode properly. Well, maybe we can work around this requirement? I still need to learn about the details, but what happens for example if the STA sends the ACK and then resets due to a crash? I guess the AP is able to cope with that, no? So maybe we can relax the rules a bit (unless we become really incompliant with the standard of course). Mattias -- 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
