On Thursday 20 May 2010 02:07:25 you wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Bruno Randolf <br1@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > + * @NL80211_ATTR_ANTENNA_TX: Bitmap of antennas to use for transmitting.
> > + * @NL80211_ATTR_ANTENNA_RX: Bitmap of antennas to use for receiving.
>
> This gets the job done, but that's it. The API defined allows for a
> hugely loose implementation on each driver.
i tried to define it like this, in the commit log:
The antenna configuration is defined as a bitmap of allowed antennas. This
bitmap is 8 bit at the moment, each bit representing one antenna. If
multiple antennas are selected, the driver may use diversity for receive
and transmit.
is this not precise enough? i am mostly concerned with what i believe is the
most common usecase (selecting one fixed antenna, or antenna diversity). i'd
say this is 99% of all use cases. but this API would also allow us to define
more advanved things like 'transmit on antenna 1, receive on antenna 2". i
know that there are possibly more crazy (and very rare) configurations, like
use several panel antennas + omni, which can't be configured with this API,
but it's hard to find a common API for all possibilities, and i think it would
be possible to extend the API later on for such cases.
> And yet for another driver it could be something completely different
> in usersepace.
what do you think that could be, realistically, given the above definition?
> I think it would be better for us to define a static
> API for all legacy cards and another for 802.11n cards, or unify them
> but to be very specific about the API for antenna settings/chainmask
> settings.
sure. any suggestions?
bruno
--
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
