On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 23:36 -0700, Johannes Berg wrote:
> So after the previous changes we were still unhappy with how
> convoluted the API is and decided to make things simpler for
> everybody. This completely changes the rate control API, now
> taking into account 802.11n with MCS rates and more control,
> most drivers don't support that though.
>
> Signed-off-by: Felix Fietkau <nbd@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[...]
> @@ -318,9 +348,33 @@ static void iwl3945_rx_reply_tx(struct i
> }
>
> info = IEEE80211_SKB_CB(txq->txb[txq->q.read_ptr].skb[0]);
> - memset(&info->status, 0, sizeof(info->status));
> + ieee80211_tx_info_clear_status(info);
> +
> + /* Fill the MRR chain with some info about on-chip retransmissions */
> + rate_idx = iwl3945_hwrate_to_plcp_idx(tx_resp->rate);
> + if (info->band == IEEE80211_BAND_5GHZ)
> + rate_idx -= IWL_FIRST_OFDM_RATE;
> +
> + info->status.rates[0].count = tx_resp->failure_frame + 1;
This is useless. And it is even confusable with the later count++.
> + fail = tx_resp->failure_frame;
> + for(i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
Where does the '4' come from? Why not IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES?
> + int next = iwl3945_rs_next_rate(priv, rate_idx);
> +
> + info->status.rates[i].idx = rate_idx;
> +
> + if ((rate_idx == next) || (i == 3)) {
ditto
[...]
Other iwlwifi changes looks fine to me.
Thanks,
-yi
--
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
