Return-path: Received: from xc.sipsolutions.net ([83.246.72.84]:56584 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755233AbYIIJnH (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2008 05:43:07 -0400 Subject: Re: HT action frame code From: Johannes Berg To: Tomas Winkler Cc: Jouni Malinen , Ron Rindjunsky , linux-wireless In-Reply-To: <1ba2fa240809090241g2604e3ddhfd39359fd8eb0f8b@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20080909_114115_700235_A647B926) References: <1220883730.31304.60.camel@johannes.berg> <48C5868B.8060103@w1.fi> <1220942004.31304.101.camel@johannes.berg> <1ba2fa240809090114u67086f2duc5cc9addd384e30d@mail.gmail.com> <1220948427.31304.107.camel@johannes.berg> <1ba2fa240809090146p612083aclf3a2a924a81e75e9@mail.gmail.com> <1220950358.31304.112.camel@johannes.berg> <1ba2fa240809090241g2604e3ddhfd39359fd8eb0f8b@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20080909_114115_700235_A647B926) Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-556V0AbPBVX5RG0ErC6j" Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 11:42:59 +0200 Message-Id: <1220953379.31304.124.camel@johannes.berg> (sfid-20080909_114331_346251_87BFA8EC) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --=-556V0AbPBVX5RG0ErC6j Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 12:41 +0300, Tomas Winkler wrote: > >> Meaning that other management frames are forward to user space while > >> BA action frames > >> are treated inside mac80211. > > > > Can you point out where? I don't see it. > It's should be visible in AP code Yi has posted, unfortunately don't > have it open right now. Anyhow since then the rx flow has changed a > lot as you know :) so it has to be reinvented. Ok, so it's not in the current code and I'm not entirely stupid for not finding it, heh :) I don't think I even still have the patches on this box so I won't look. > >> > Also, I'm not talking about the AP triggering the aggregation sessio= n, > >> > this is entirely done with the rate scaling right now, but about an > >> > associated STA wanting to start an aggregation session. Aren't > >> > aggregation sessions always triggered by whoever wants to send? So i= f a > >> > STA notices it has lots of upload going on it could want to trigger = a BA > >> > session, which is something we don't currently support afaict. > >> > >> In iwl-agn-rs.c There is not difference if the peer is STA or AP. So > >> we support this already. > > > > Not sure what this has to do with the Intel RS algorithm? >=20 > Just the trigger for aggregation is implemented there. Otherwise > nothing special. Well yes, but that just triggers when aggregation on our end, what I'd been thinking about was when the remote side wants to start aggregation. johannes --=-556V0AbPBVX5RG0ErC6j Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Johannes Berg (powerbook) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJIxkUfAAoJEKVg1VMiehFY248QAJCmYGlACZBUr3IgQDvHaeH3 yuYyWpzmC/S+L0jMKv4Dhdo43VEBgHoQF4vzOKfVtR1bOitlyfx2qVAGp6qzle7I OkqKLYPGZngzlrvaUF6W4N5fqN5Tt5VZpUeR1zRIIOon9HfsfpNLEkqtJgQkUNm9 L22DPAnBdRM+dsfeYYwKi74XjJNeA60VjtI3m6dPhcKyvJM/pZssZUX90RX3d0Bc 4lt9qjuiFWnFSdedYmEDYAInBUxgQn0sONvRAVyeBkpOkMnn2XSznypIPx6ZTSsy XJbqHqBh+Z5sWB/ARwulQ1HLjAz4EjvvJ3o8ge/OHB2ez0B3lBJ/o/A9Ivy2qsMo 5eJ5JRwGCTxI0AOGG5knXFwRc6EZgXxaruKkWTIKZH7qPIfvkOMAK07fHeS57TbO VeFz6wCfu21oMFgcc2+Ujf2E7lqNBew3RMXPs4dvm7jQjqfE9zMyL5ZoX4F38e23 csGNoPHtjpxINe2h9ioLjv8ZB0SexzPvLOVbTlkrQ42ddMIRRv/soN0DKiQshFxX 4KsjzOqDKLZJs7zWdhgFbax9GD1OMHeZ+8tmpcs5KICB3uhUBc/eJs00sHQaPGcw ZI469d282C+2uFsXWtfzliGEypTsLrwp7JgJP1DwHXbMtZwTv509ntpmIJ42GZTY tCcpTb7kau2KuxOT5bzn =bvuk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-556V0AbPBVX5RG0ErC6j--