On Sat, 2012-02-25 at 11:22 -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > .. and this doesn't yet address VHT160, which is part of the 11ac spec too. > > I think it's worth having a bit more of a total, overall architecture > discussion about what 11ac support -should- look like before bits are > comitted, so you don't have to go and change them later (and possibly > break some internal company drivers whilst doing so.) Not like I care about that at all ... we change things all the time and break drivers in the process. Is it even feasible to have non-upstream drivers on the current wireless stack? I'd think you'd have to dedicate one person full time to following our mac80211 changes ;-) > So - what else is likely needed for the upcoming 11ac standard? Well so obviously we need things like VHT capability stuff (advertising, in scans, in assoc, for AP/GO mode in station info). I suspect you're talking only about the regulatory/channel stuff? Mostly I'm confused about the split channel thing there but I suppose regulatory-wise it's just like using two channels at the same time. > Disclaimer: I'm speaking from my personal opinion rather than that of > Qualcomm Atheros. Does anyone here have an "official opinion"? I doubt 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
