From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail30t.wh2.ocn.ne.jp ([125.206.180.136]:3740 "HELO mail30t.wh2.ocn.ne.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751298Ab0DMH4f (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Apr 2010 03:56:35 -0400 Received: from vs3002.wh2.ocn.ne.jp (125.206.180.165) by mail30t.wh2.ocn.ne.jp (RS ver 1.0.95vs) with SMTP id 2-073175392 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:56:33 +0900 (JST) From: Bruno Randolf To: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mac80211: Initialize IBSS basic rates according to band Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:56:39 +0900 Cc: linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org References: <20100412073658.28078.32155.stgit@tt-desk> <201004130916.18626.br1@einfach.org> <1271143275.4885.3.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> In-Reply-To: <1271143275.4885.3.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Message-Id: <201004131656.40025.br1@einfach.org> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tuesday 13 April 2010 16:21:15 Johannes Berg wrote: > On Tue, 2010-04-13 at 09:16 +0900, Bruno Randolf wrote: > > On Monday 12 April 2010 17:40:52 you wrote: > > > On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 17:34 +0900, Bruno Randolf wrote: > > > > before we unconditionally used 3 (1Mbps, 2 Mbps) as basic rates. this > > > > clearly is wrong in the 5GHz band. > > > > > > No, it's fine. Look again at how this works. > > > > (hello? can you please stop treating me like an idiot?) > > > > this means we use 6 and 9 as basic rates in the 5GHz band. > > we should use 6, 12 and 24. > > No, we can treat 6 and 9 as basic rates if we want to when we create the > IBSS. You seem to be confusing basic and mandatory rates or something > else that I can't make sense of. It's NOT "clearly wrong". ok, i agree that we are probably allowed to choose any basic rates when we create an IBSS - but the question is: why would we want to use lower rates? does it not make sense to use all mandatory rates as basic rates? as a side note: the reason i am concerned about the basic rates is that when we use RTC/CTS (which are sent at a basic rate) thruput gets quite low when the basic rates are (too?) low. this is a tradeoff between reliability and speed - and probably should be user configurable. so maybe instead of adding a "g-only" flag to ibss creation, should i add an iw command for setting the basic rates? what do you think about that? bruno