From: Vladimir Koutny <vlado@work.ksp.sk>
To: bruno randolf <bruno@thinktube.com>
Cc: linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC] WARNING: at net/mac80211/ieee80211_rate.h:159 rate_lowest_index()
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:03:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48188A3D.70707@work.ksp.sk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200804292042.20500.bruno@thinktube.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2078 bytes --]
>> [...]
>>
>> The question is how sta->supp_rates should be initialized:
>>
>> - we could initialize it to our sta's rates, but then we could
>> probably transmit to a station at unsupported rate
>
> isn't this what is done right now, and the rateset is zero sometimes and then
> we get the warning?
Yes, kind-of. It is initialized to the rateset of an ibss we are part of,
which is the one of ibss we are joining to, or our supported rateset if we
create a new one. However, it is 0 before one of those 2 actions happen, and
then we get the warning.
> this might be wrong anyways: as you said it could make us send frames at an
> unsupported rate.
Actually, this can happen even now:
- we join an g-ibss, thus setting the rateset to 1-54
- we receive a data frame from a b-only station -> we assign all 1-54 rates to it
- we send something to this station
Probably not a big issue, as a) we will update the sta-rateset on its beacon,
and b) I would expect that such an ibss would adapt to 1-11 only in the
presence of b-only station..
>
>> - add new ibss station only on received beacon, not on a data frame;
>> currently, beacons are ignored for this purpose (they just update
>> the bss list later on)
>
> i think stations should be added on reception of both beacons and data frames.
Or, do we need this information _before_ joining/creating a new ibss?
Couldn't we just ignore all STAs around until we have a reason not to?
>
>> - something else (like 1Mbps only)?
>
> what about the rate of the currently received data frame (and maybe any other
> rates we could safely deduce from that)?
Yes, that would be a reasonable option - providing that we have the rate
(which we should - there is a WARN_ON(1) in rx-path if it is not set correctly)
As I think about that, I would suggest:
- no sta info is being collected prior to join/create
- sta entry is added/updated on each beacon with reported rateset
- sta entry is added/updated on data frames with just the received-rate
Vlado
>
> bruno
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 370 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-30 15:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-29 16:01 [RFC] WARNING: at net/mac80211/ieee80211_rate.h:159 rate_lowest_index() Vladimir Koutny
2008-04-29 18:42 ` bruno randolf
2008-04-30 15:03 ` Vladimir Koutny [this message]
2008-04-30 15:05 ` Johannes Berg
2008-04-30 15:46 ` Vladimir Koutny
2008-04-30 14:20 ` Johannes Berg
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=48188A3D.70707@work.ksp.sk \
--to=vlado@work.ksp.sk \
--cc=bruno@thinktube.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