Return-path: Received: from mail-qy0-f11.google.com ([209.85.221.11]:55246 "EHLO mail-qy0-f11.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752773AbYK0UCY (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Nov 2008 15:02:24 -0500 Received: by qyk4 with SMTP id 4so1378978qyk.13 for ; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 12:02:22 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <69e28c910811271202s295bbf5bo3dc8c04c50b08a01@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20081127_210227_870948_B9917443) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 21:02:22 +0100 From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stefanik_G=E1bor?=" To: "Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski" Subject: Re: [RFC] rtl8187: Do not wait for an ACK when IEEE80211_TX_CTL_NO_ACK is set Cc: linux-wireless , "Hin-Tak Leung" , "Larry Finger" , "Johannes Berg" , "John W. Linville" In-Reply-To: <200811271543.59126.herton@mandriva.com.br> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 References: <69e28c910811261431u26e341d3p51ebadca807f4b61@mail.gmail.com> <200811271543.59126.herton@mandriva.com.br> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 6:43 PM, Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski wrote: > > nack. > > I've seen other drivers set just a flag when hardware has a bit field to > signalize that there isn't need to ack the tx packet to be sent, but > don't saw anyone changing retry in tx hw header. Also setting to 0 in > no_ack case looks wrong, for example see ath5k where it even checks for > 0 and returns an error if you try to do this. > > -- > []'s > Herton > IMO the current implementation is even worse - completely disregard NO_ACK, and when a packet that should not be ACKed according to IEEE 802.11:2007 is sent (such as a broadcast), retry repeatedly until timeout. Also, v26.1010 of the vendor driver does exactly what my patch does. -- Vista: [V]iruses, [I]ntruders, [S]pyware, [T]rojans and [A]dware. :-)