On Sat, 2010-05-08 at 01:01 +0200, Benoit Papillault wrote:
> > It would be helpful if you were to rebase over my patch that adds the
> > channel type tracking.
>
> Your patches are now in wireless-testing, so I am doing it at the moment.
Thanks.
> >> + if (channel_type != NL80211_CHAN_NO_HT&&
> >> + sband->ht_cap.ht_supported) {
> >
> > You shouldn't be able to get here with an HT channel but !ht_supported,
> > no? Or is that to support the case where you have HT only on one band?
>
> Good point. I think there are several cases here :
>
> - a non-HT STA is joining an HT IBSS (we need to check 802.11n-2009 to
> see how it's supposed to be handled). In this case channel_type could be
> ht40+ and ht_supported = false
Hmm, true.
> - an HT STA is joining a non-HT IBSS. It's clear in this case that no HT
> IE should be sent, which is catched by (channel_type !=
> NL80211_CHAN_NO_HT) condition.
Right.
> Could we examine those cases in a follow up patch?
Well what do we actually need to do then?
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +int ieee80211_add_ht_info(u8 **ppos,
> >> + struct ieee80211_supported_band *sband,
> >> + struct ieee80211_channel *channel,
> >> + enum nl80211_channel_type channel_type)
> >
> > what's wrong with ieee80211_add_ht_ie()
>
> Seems it's close to what I'm doing, but not entirely the same. I will
> read it. If applicable, should I move ieee80211_add_ht_ie to util.c (and
> declaration to ieee80211_i.h) then ?
Yes.
Also I just noticed that there's a TODO item in rx.c when we receive an
HT frame from a peer we don't know about yet. Not sure what to do there,
but you'll need to look at it.
johannes
--
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
