From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from he.sipsolutions.net ([78.46.109.217]:59900 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932447Ab0HJRSl (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Aug 2010 13:18:41 -0400 Subject: Re: [ipw3945-devel] [PATCH 0/1] fix for 2.6.35 From: Johannes Berg To: "Guy, Wey-Yi" Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , "linville@tuxdriver.com" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "ipw3945-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" In-Reply-To: <1281459872.6027.6.camel@wwguy-ubuntu> References: <1281376622-6835-1-git-send-email-wey-yi.w.guy@intel.com> <1281459872.6027.6.camel@wwguy-ubuntu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:18:36 +0200 Message-ID: <1281460716.3759.2.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 2010-08-10 at 10:04 -0700, Guy, Wey-Yi wrote: > > This patch has an awesome commit log entry and describes issues with > > the current RTS mechanism and improvements made on the patch for > > different scenarios :-) > > but in no way talks about issues with association > > with 5 GHz APs. Can you clarify in the commit log how it cures issues > > with 5 GHz, if that is indeed an intended fix for it? > Johannes might be able to add more, the original attempt of this patch > is to prevent un-necessary protection for non-data frames which we > introduced few rc ago. while we fix this, but we also found out this > patch also address the issue we have for 5GHz unable to associate to AP. Well it does describe what it's intended to fix, we just found out that a side effect of trying to protect too many frames can be, but maybe isn't always, that you can't associate on 5 GHz because the protection mechanism fails on the direct probe probe request frame ... johannes