From: Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>
To: Janusz Dziedzic <janusz.dziedzic@tieto.com>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: add use_minrate param to ieee80211_tx_prepare_skb()
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 12:06:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160105100659.GA3864@w1.fi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALhHN=qfmdQuTeHEAvE0BgS2XvZJrBVUhU3BYgXMCY-pe5Ur0g@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:56:18AM +0100, Janusz Dziedzic wrote:
> On 5 January 2016 at 10:45, Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:00:19AM +0100, Janusz Dziedzic wrote:
> >> Add use_minrate param to ieee80211_tx_prepare_skb() function.
> >> This is useful in case we would like to send frames
> >> with lowest rates, eg. nullfunc, probe_resp.
> >
> > I could kind of understand this for short frames like Data nullfunc and
> > PS-Poll, but why would we like to hard code Probe Response frames to be
> > sent at the lowest rate? Shouldn't the frames be sent at a rate that is
> > most likely to get them through and do so in a manner that does not use
> > excessive amount of air time?
> >
> This is used to get/send probe_req() frame, next used by ath9k
> "hw_scan" when chanctx used.
Sure, but that's not what I'm asking. I'm asking why would we want to
force Probe Response frames to use the lowest rate based on that commit
message above. If that's a typo and should have been Probe Request
frame, I'm going to ask the same question about Probe Request frames.
Why would we like to force the lowest rate to be used for them?
--
Jouni Malinen PGP id EFC895FA
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-05 10:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-05 9:00 [PATCH] mac80211: add use_minrate param to ieee80211_tx_prepare_skb() Janusz Dziedzic
2016-01-05 9:45 ` Jouni Malinen
2016-01-05 9:56 ` Janusz Dziedzic
2016-01-05 10:06 ` Jouni Malinen [this message]
2016-01-05 10:16 ` Janusz Dziedzic
2016-01-05 10:18 ` Janusz Dziedzic
2016-01-05 10:28 ` Johannes Berg
2016-01-05 22:08 ` Jouni Malinen
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=20160105100659.GA3864@w1.fi \
--to=j@w1.fi \
--cc=janusz.dziedzic@tieto.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).