From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from he.sipsolutions.net ([78.46.109.217]:34097 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752526Ab1I2KVY (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Sep 2011 06:21:24 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: Allow NO_ACK flag overwrite for injected frames From: Johannes Berg To: Helmut Schaa Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linville@tuxdriver.com In-Reply-To: (sfid-20110929_120247_235174_E8D6A29A) References: <1317288432-26380-1-git-send-email-helmut.schaa@googlemail.com> <1317290375.3974.1.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20110929_120247_235174_E8D6A29A) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 12:21:12 +0200 Message-ID: <1317291672.3974.3.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20110929_122128_131233_D4F837B3) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2011-09-29 at 12:02 +0200, Helmut Schaa wrote: > > Makes sense, but I wonder if we really should continue using > > radiotap :-) Maybe mgmt-tx in nl80211 would be appropriate. An nl80211 flag, and the right modifications in hostapd to use mgmt-tx and the flag. But I guess that's just another thing on the growing list of things to do to move hostapd to not use monitor interfaces ... > Hmm, not sure how much work that would be ... > > >> @@ -1257,7 +1265,7 @@ ieee80211_tx_prepare(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata, > >> tx->flags |= IEEE80211_TX_UNICAST; > >> if (unlikely(local->wifi_wme_noack_test)) > >> info->flags |= IEEE80211_TX_CTL_NO_ACK; > >> - else > >> + else if (!(info->flags & IEEE80211_TX_CTL_NO_ACK)) > >> info->flags &= ~IEEE80211_TX_CTL_NO_ACK; > > > > ?? > > Don't remove the IEEE80211_TX_CTL_NO_ACK flag when it was set via radiotap. Well, ok, but the logic is: if (flag not set) unset flag which is kinda useless, right? johannes