From: Oleksij Rempel <linux@rempel-privat.de>
To: ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
Subject: [ath9k-devel] [PATCH 1/2] ath9k_htc: add STBC TX support
Date: Sat, 04 May 2013 20:29:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51855397.1020802@rempel-privat.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmok_kAfoO0DEwGCsmiqeokEnURNoaLU-860X1EgENGMogQ@mail.gmail.com>
Am 04.05.2013 19:50, schrieb Adrian Chadd:
> I've just reviewed it myself:
>
> * oan->stbc is enabled only if the hardware itself supports STBC; so
> it's an extra sanity check in case the firmware is told to enable STBC
> in the WMI capflag field.
all STBC parts are not compiled for AR9271. Currently firmware will do
sanity check on htc_7010.fw and always return 1, and wont do any check
on htc_9271.fw (this part is just not compiled).
> * is oan->htinfo used anywhere that may involve STBC?
hmm...oan->htinfo?
> * .. we should check whether ath9k_htc ever set the STBC flags on
> AR9271, or we'd end up confusing the hardware.
no, never. there are legion guardians ;) last on is on preparing tx
descriptor.
> * .. I don't think that is important though, as we weren't _doing_ STBC, right?
correct, currently STBC is not working on linux ath9k_htc
> * Why are the ATH_RC_* flags used in newassoc_11n? This comes from the
> WMI WMI_RC_STATE_CHANGE_CMDID capflag field; where are _those_
> defined?
they are in target_firmware/wlan/if_athrate.h
and well, there are a bit more problems thin them.
See attachment :) Attached patch can go on top of my merge request for
firmware. So, i will probably need to make Patch_v5 for ath9k_htc... since.
Felix,
> In addition to that, using the WLAN_RC_* flags is wrong, you need to use
> the ATH_RC_* flags,...
After some firmware cleaning i will need to use WLAN_RC_* flags :)
WLAN_RC_* have same values like ATH_RC_*...
> Grr, so many things to tidy up.
--
Regards,
Oleksij
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: tmp_2.diff
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 2393 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20130504/50e3eb32/attachment.bin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Oleksij Rempel <linux@rempel-privat.de>
To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
Cc: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>,
ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] [PATCH 1/2] ath9k_htc: add STBC TX support
Date: Sat, 04 May 2013 20:29:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51855397.1020802@rempel-privat.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmok_kAfoO0DEwGCsmiqeokEnURNoaLU-860X1EgENGMogQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1534 bytes --]
Am 04.05.2013 19:50, schrieb Adrian Chadd:
> I've just reviewed it myself:
>
> * oan->stbc is enabled only if the hardware itself supports STBC; so
> it's an extra sanity check in case the firmware is told to enable STBC
> in the WMI capflag field.
all STBC parts are not compiled for AR9271. Currently firmware will do
sanity check on htc_7010.fw and always return 1, and wont do any check
on htc_9271.fw (this part is just not compiled).
> * is oan->htinfo used anywhere that may involve STBC?
hmm...oan->htinfo?
> * .. we should check whether ath9k_htc ever set the STBC flags on
> AR9271, or we'd end up confusing the hardware.
no, never. there are legion guardians ;) last on is on preparing tx
descriptor.
> * .. I don't think that is important though, as we weren't _doing_ STBC, right?
correct, currently STBC is not working on linux ath9k_htc
> * Why are the ATH_RC_* flags used in newassoc_11n? This comes from the
> WMI WMI_RC_STATE_CHANGE_CMDID capflag field; where are _those_
> defined?
they are in target_firmware/wlan/if_athrate.h
and well, there are a bit more problems thin them.
See attachment :) Attached patch can go on top of my merge request for
firmware. So, i will probably need to make Patch_v5 for ath9k_htc... since.
Felix,
> In addition to that, using the WLAN_RC_* flags is wrong, you need to use
> the ATH_RC_* flags,...
After some firmware cleaning i will need to use WLAN_RC_* flags :)
WLAN_RC_* have same values like ATH_RC_*...
> Grr, so many things to tidy up.
--
Regards,
Oleksij
[-- Attachment #2: tmp_2.diff --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 2393 bytes --]
diff --git a/target_firmware/wlan/ratectrl11n.h b/target_firmware/wlan/ratectrl11n.h
index 64d0197..00fd156 100755
--- a/target_firmware/wlan/ratectrl11n.h
+++ b/target_firmware/wlan/ratectrl11n.h
@@ -156,20 +156,6 @@ typedef struct {
} RATE_TABLE_11N;
/*
- * Update the SIB's rate control information
- *
- * This should be called when the supported rates change
- * (e.g. SME operation, wireless mode change)
- *
- * It will determine which rates are valid for use.
- */
-void rcSibUpdate_11n(struct ath_softc_tgt *,
- struct ath_node_target *,
- A_UINT32 capflag,
- A_BOOL keepState,
- struct ieee80211_rate *rs);
-
-/*
* Determines and returns the new Tx rate index.
*/
void rcRateFind_11n(struct ath_softc_tgt *sc,
diff --git a/target_firmware/wlan/ratectrl_11n_ln.c b/target_firmware/wlan/ratectrl_11n_ln.c
index 52c1fc7..e64b254 100755
--- a/target_firmware/wlan/ratectrl_11n_ln.c
+++ b/target_firmware/wlan/ratectrl_11n_ln.c
@@ -429,19 +429,7 @@ rcSibUpdate_ht(struct ath_softc_tgt *sc, struct ath_node_target *an,
rcSortValidRates(pRateTable, pRc);
}
-void
-rcSibUpdate_11n(struct ath_softc_tgt *sc, struct ath_node_target *pSib,
- A_UINT32 capflag, A_BOOL keepState, struct ieee80211_rate *pRateSet)
-{
- rcSibUpdate_ht(sc,
- pSib,
- ((capflag & ATH_RC_DS_FLAG) ? WLAN_RC_DS_FLAG : 0) |
- ((capflag & ATH_RC_HT40_SGI_FLAG) ? WLAN_RC_HT40_SGI_FLAG : 0) |
- ((capflag & ATH_RC_HT_FLAG) ? WLAN_RC_HT_FLAG : 0) |
- ((capflag & ATH_RC_CW40_FLAG) ? WLAN_RC_40_FLAG : 0),
- keepState,
- pRateSet);
-}
+
/*
* Return the median of three numbers
@@ -1212,17 +1200,11 @@ ath_rate_newassoc_11n(struct ath_softc_tgt *sc, struct ath_node_target *an, int
if (isnew) {
struct atheros_node *oan = ATH_NODE_ATHEROS(an);
- oan->htcap = ((capflag & ATH_RC_DS_FLAG) ? WLAN_RC_DS_FLAG : 0) |
- ((capflag & ATH_RC_HT40_SGI_FLAG) ? WLAN_RC_HT40_SGI_FLAG : 0) |
- ((capflag & ATH_RC_HT_FLAG) ? WLAN_RC_HT_FLAG : 0) |
- ((capflag & ATH_RC_CW40_FLAG) ? WLAN_RC_40_FLAG : 0) |
- ((capflag & ATH_RC_WEP_TKIP_FLAG) ? WLAN_RC_WEP_TKIP_FLAG : 0);
-
#ifdef MAGPIE_MERLIN
/* Only MERLIN can send STBC */
oan->stbc = (capflag & ATH_RC_RX_STBC_FLAG) ? 1 : 0;
#endif
- rcSibUpdate_11n(sc, an, oan->htcap, 0, rs);
+ rcSibUpdate_ht(sc, an, capflag, 0, rs);
}
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-04 18:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-02 8:11 [ath9k-devel] [PATCH 0/2] work sync Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 8:11 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 8:11 ` [ath9k-devel] [PATCH 1/2] ath9k_htc: add STBC TX support Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 8:11 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 16:55 ` [ath9k-devel] " Adrian Chadd
2013-05-02 16:55 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-05-02 17:32 ` [ath9k-devel] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 17:32 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 18:01 ` [ath9k-devel] " Felix Fietkau
2013-05-02 18:01 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-05-02 20:15 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-05-02 20:15 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-05-04 6:50 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 6:50 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 6:55 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 6:55 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 10:02 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-05-04 10:02 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-05-04 11:08 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 11:08 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 11:16 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-05-04 11:16 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-05-04 11:28 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 11:28 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 14:49 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-05-04 14:49 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-05-04 17:50 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-05-04 17:50 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-05-04 18:29 ` Oleksij Rempel [this message]
2013-05-04 18:29 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 7:33 ` [ath9k-devel] [PATCH v2] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 7:33 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 8:44 ` [ath9k-devel] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 10:59 ` [ath9k-devel] [PATCH] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 10:59 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 11:32 ` [ath9k-devel] [PATCH v4] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 11:32 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 20:32 ` [ath9k-devel] [PATCH 1/2] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 20:32 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 8:11 ` [ath9k-devel] [PATCH 2/2] ath9k: remove useless flag conversation Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 8:11 ` Oleksij Rempel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=51855397.1020802@rempel-privat.de \
--to=linux@rempel-privat.de \
--cc=ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.