On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 17:56 +0200, Tomas Winkler wrote: > >> In addition iwlwifi HW release TX packets in order to mac80211 i.e. no >> need to maintain the transition window >> so simple flag maybe shell revert the flow into regular tx response >> flow in mac80211. >> Only rate scaling is aware that the packets were transmitted >> aggregated, we did some hacking there around this it should be cleaned >> up. > > I wonder how we're going to pass them down to the driver anyway. And how > about rate control, is that really done per sub-frame? Does that make > any sense? Sub frame? This is bit misleading in this context .This is not AMSDU. This is rather a regular frame to be sent in a burst. >I'm thinking that if we pass a fraglist down for the ampdu, If you are able to do this you can also build AMSDU frame from the frames, in AMPDU i prefer the streaming approach and the decision about how many frames get into current TXOP is pushed as low as possible, But maybe again I'm seeing this from iwlwifi perspective. > then we should have the fraglist in tx status too, in one go... If rate > control is per subframe maybe it just needs to be made aware to walk the > fraglist? The rate scale should be aware of aggregation in order to be more responsive (consider each aggregation as single transition) while frame completion should be in order to preserve ordered definition of 802.11. protocol to upper layers (only completed sub window is released up) Tomas -- 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
