On 2010-04-19 12:19 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-04-19 at 12:14 +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>> On 2010-04-19 11:09 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2010-04-19 at 11:06 +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>> >> On 2010-04-19 10:59 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
>> >> > On Mon, 2010-04-19 at 10:45 +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>> >> >> On 2010-04-19 7:57 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
>> >> >> > On Sun, 2010-04-18 at 18:05 +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> + * @IEEE80211_TX_CTL_STBC: tells the driver to use Space-Time Block Coding
>> >> >> >> >> + * (STBC) for this frame.
>> >> >> >> >> */
>> >> >> >> >> enum mac80211_tx_control_flags {
>> >> >> >> >> IEEE80211_TX_CTL_REQ_TX_STATUS = BIT(0),
>> >> >> >> >> @@ -299,6 +301,7 @@ enum mac80211_tx_control_flags {
>> >> >> >> >> IEEE80211_TX_INTFL_HAS_RADIOTAP = BIT(20),
>> >> >> >> >> IEEE80211_TX_INTFL_NL80211_FRAME_TX = BIT(21),
>> >> >> >> >> IEEE80211_TX_CTL_LDPC = BIT(22),
>> >> >> >> >> + IEEE80211_TX_CTL_STBC = BIT(23),
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > What if the # of streams is different? That doesn't look sufficient.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Hm, you're right. I initially thought the combination of the MCS index
>> >> >> >> and the STBC flag would be enough, but there are still some corner cases.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Hm actually I guess that should be sufficient? What corner case are you
>> >> >> > thinking of?
>> >> >> Support for multi-rate retry and STBC with more than one stream on one
>> >> >> side, using rates from both MCS0-7 and MCS8-15 in the rate series.
>> >> >> Rx STBC for only one stream on the other side.
>> >> >
>> >> > So the flag should be per rate entry instead, no?
>> >
>> >> Well, I think if we use two bits in the tx control flags, we don't need
>> >> it to be per rate entry.
>> >
>> > But then you can't probe stbc properly, can you?
>> I'm not sure we even need to probe STBC. In all of the drivers that I've
>> looked at, it's always enabled if the peer supports it.
>> I'm not aware of any situation where it would make the reception worse,
>> aside from hardware damage of course ;)
>
> Ok ... I guess two bits then so you don't have to look up sta capability
> when doing the hw programming?
Right. I'll send a new series later.
- Felix
--
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
