On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 17:30 +0800, Zhu Yi wrote: > On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 17:20 +0800, Johannes Berg wrote: > > Is it? I don't think so. Many drivers go up beyond that as far as I > > know. Then some do different things like putting it in a different DMA > > block. > > > > > While for those drivers really need a bigger > > > extra headroom and support Rx aggregation, this probably means > > > ieee80211_skb_resize. But the resize should always happen for every > > > packet from the IP stack, right? > > > > No, davem and I optimised that away a long time ago via using > > netdev->needed_headroom and netdev->needed_tailroom. It even works for > > bridges and their slave devices, iirc. > > I missed this. Will check it. If so, I'll add another parameter to pass > the extra hw tx headroom to ieee80211_asmdu_to_8023s. The thing is that I'm not even sure if we can possibly forward a frame after this deaggregation. I'll poke at the code. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
