From: Oleksij Rempel <linux@rempel-privat.de>
To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
Cc: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>,
ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] [PATCH 1/2] ath9k_htc: add STBC TX support
Date: Sat, 04 May 2013 08:50:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5184AFC2.8060101@rempel-privat.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmo=XYK=Jkc40U_vJO03n+tiA_LDpw8e1QKYRX6-+E9o4fA@mail.gmail.com>
Am 02.05.2013 22:15, schrieb Adrian Chadd:
> Well, let's dig into the firmware a bit more and tidy up how STBC is handled.
Does it mean, i should change this patch and provide a patch for
firmware too?
I still do not think, changing peer caps i a good idea in any case.
I mena this part of patch:
+ if (sta->ht_cap.cap & IEEE80211_HT_CAP_TX_STBC)
+ caps |= WLAN_RC_TX_STBC_FLAG;
Behaviour with this patch will be fallowing:
- peer provide caps, even if it is RX-STBC12
- we pass this information to firmware and ratecontroller of FW, do
right decision based on hardware it has.
You suggestion, if i understand it correctly, is to filter caps:
- if peer provide more than we can, we should tell firmware the value
what we can. So, if peer say it can RX-STBC12, we should tell firmware
that peer is RX-STBC1.
In my opinion, this kind of filter is a source for hidden errors.
--
Regards,
Oleksij
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-04 6:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-02 8:11 [PATCH 0/2] work sync Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 8:11 ` [PATCH 1/2] ath9k_htc: add STBC TX support Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 16:55 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-05-02 17:32 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 18:01 ` [ath9k-devel] " Felix Fietkau
2013-05-02 20:15 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-05-04 6:50 ` Oleksij Rempel [this message]
2013-05-04 6:55 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 10:02 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-05-04 11:08 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 11:16 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-05-04 11:28 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 14:49 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-05-04 17:50 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-05-04 18:29 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 7:33 ` [PATCH v2] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 10:59 ` [PATCH] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-04 11:32 ` [PATCH v4] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 20:32 ` [ath9k-devel] [PATCH 1/2] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-05-02 8:11 ` [PATCH 2/2] ath9k: remove useless flag conversation Oleksij Rempel
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=5184AFC2.8060101@rempel-privat.de \
--to=linux@rempel-privat.de \
--cc=adrian@freebsd.org \
--cc=ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nbd@openwrt.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).