Return-path: Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]:38615 "EHLO fencepost.gnu.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932569AbXC1Udg (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Mar 2007 16:33:36 -0400 Received: from proski by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HWenn-0005bI-4J for linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 16:31:27 -0400 Subject: Re: [Radiotap] Re: RFC: radiotap discrepancy in Linux vs OpenBSD From: Pavel Roskin To: Marcelo Tosatti Cc: David Young , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Scott Raynel , radiotap@mail.ojctech.com In-Reply-To: <20070328180413.GC17793@dmt> References: <20070325232416.64xwkc0kw04oosg0@webmail.spamcop.net> <20070326033729.GG31621@che.ojctech.com> <1174949149.28132.49.camel@dv> <20070328180413.GC17793@dmt> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 16:33:32 -0400 Message-Id: <1175114012.9299.4.camel@dv> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 15:04 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 06:45:49PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote: > > On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 22:37 -0500, David Young wrote: > > > > > > One is found in the current wireless-2.6.git: > > > > > > > > IEEE80211_RADIOTAP_RX_FLAGS = 14, > > > > IEEE80211_RADIOTAP_TX_FLAGS = 15, > > > > IEEE80211_RADIOTAP_RTS_RETRIES = 16, > > > > IEEE80211_RADIOTAP_DATA_RETRIES = 17, > > > > > > These fields are slated to become part of the standard, I just haven't got > > > around to updating the manual page, yet. I have time to do that tonight. > > > > OK. I was wrong to assume that non-standard fields were introduced on > > the Linux side. > > I mentioned those in the past to David Young, but I forgot to resend > them to the radiotap list. Then we need to remove IEEE80211_RADIOTAP_FCS from Linux ieee80211_radiotap.h. It's only present in a comment, but it's a comment that can be harmful. I could submit a patch, but it would conflict with a patch that does sparse annotation. OK, I'll submit both. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin