On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 01:51 +0200, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> +static int ieee80211_set_mcast_rate(struct wiphy *wiphy, struct net_device *dev,
> + int mcast_rate[IEEE80211_NUM_BANDS])
> +{
> + struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata = IEEE80211_DEV_TO_SUB_IF(dev);
> + u32 basic_rates = sdata->vif.bss_conf.basic_rates;
> + int i;
> +
> + /* check if the mcast_rates are also in basic_rates */
> + for (i = 0; i < IEEE80211_NUM_BANDS; i++)
> + if (!(basic_rates & BIT(mcast_rate[i] - 1)))
> + return -EINVAL;
So this is kinda broken. In fact, the whole basic rate thing is broken
it seems.
The mcast rate is per band, as it should, since you could find the same
BSSID on a 5 GHz channel and then jump to that channel if the TSF is
higher...
However, the basic rates aren't, which is wrong: the basic rates bitmap
could be 1,2,6,9. If the driver is like most drivers, that translates to
a bitmap of 0x33. But 0x33, for most drivers, if applied to the 5 GHz
rates means 6,9,24,36. See why this is broken? A rate bitmap can't be
siwtched around between bands and still make any sense.
Oh, also, I'm not sure why you do BIT(... -1), but that's unrelated.
What kind of value is the mcast rate? A rate index, or a number?
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
