On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 11:57 AM, LukÃÅ Turek <8an@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Saturday 27 November 2010 02:31:53 Nick Kossifidis wrote: >> When we convert to core clock units it's what we should do, all >> timings should change the same way. I don't know what this >> aPHY-RX-START-Delay is but if it changes that way we can use absolute >> values as we do for slot time and sifs. > > Although aPHY-RX-START-Delay is specified in the standard, it's not needed on > Atheros hardware, probably the hardware starts the timeout countdown after it > switches to RX mode (so aPHY-RX-START-Delay is added implicitly). See my > discussion with Felix Fietkau a year ago, starting here: > http://www.mail-archive.com/ath5k-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg02810.html > > The calculation used in set_coverage_class is also the same as the one in > Madwifi driver. When I wrote that code, I intentionally kept the old initvals > when no coverage class was set to prevent regressions (the ACK timeout in > initivals is larger than the one for coverage class 0, so a long distance link > that worked before would break). Maybe I was too careful. I'm going to be ashamed to admit that this is going way beyond my understanding. You guys understand the hardware way more than I can. Once registers don't exactly map to an 802.11 value, I'm honestly out of my league. I hope I've helped find the correct values for parameters that are lifted straight out of the standard, but I'm don't want to make any comments when I don't know the full picture. Cheers, Jonathan > > Lukas Turek > -- 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
