Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f213.google.com ([209.85.220.213]:53727 "EHLO mail-fx0-f213.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753901AbZFGSZx convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Jun 2009 14:25:53 -0400 Received: by fxm9 with SMTP id 9so1697695fxm.37 for ; Sun, 07 Jun 2009 11:25:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1244246629-28179-12-git-send-email-lrodriguez@atheros.com> References: <1244246629-28179-1-git-send-email-lrodriguez@atheros.com> <1244246629-28179-12-git-send-email-lrodriguez@atheros.com> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E1bor_Stefanik?= Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 20:25:31 +0200 Message-ID: <69e28c910906071125n54128452ja77495ae5f62beed@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/15] ath9k: remove unnecessary IEEE80211_TX_CTL_NO_ACK checks To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Cc: linville@tuxdriver.com, johannes@sipsolutions.net, j@w1.fi, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org, Derek Smithies , Chittajit Mitra Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 2:03 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > We check for this condition early on in our mac80211 get_rate() > callback ath_get_rate(), so remove this check later down the path. > > Cc: Derek Smithies > Cc: Chittajit Mitra > Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez > --- > ?drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/rc.c | ? ?6 ++---- > ?1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/rc.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/rc.c > index 9907f2f..d8d2152 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/rc.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/rc.c > @@ -783,7 +783,6 @@ static void ath_rc_rate_set_rtscts(struct ath_softc *sc, > ? ? ? ? * just CTS. ?Note that this is only done for OFDM/HT unicast frames. > ? ? ? ? */ > ? ? ? ?if ((sc->sc_flags & SC_OP_PROTECT_ENABLE) && > - ? ? ? ? ? !(tx_info->flags & IEEE80211_TX_CTL_NO_ACK) && > ? ? ? ? ? ?(rate_table->info[rix].phy == WLAN_RC_PHY_OFDM || > ? ? ? ? ? ? WLAN_RC_PHY_HT(rate_table->info[rix].phy))) { > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?rates[0].flags |= IEEE80211_TX_RC_USE_CTS_PROTECT; > @@ -890,9 +889,8 @@ static void ath_rc_ratefind(struct ath_softc *sc, > ? ? ? ? * > ? ? ? ? * FIXME: Fix duration > ? ? ? ? */ > - ? ? ? if (!(tx_info->flags & IEEE80211_TX_CTL_NO_ACK) && > - ? ? ? ? ? (ieee80211_has_morefrags(fc) || > - ? ? ? ? ? ?(le16_to_cpu(hdr->seq_ctrl) & IEEE80211_SCTL_FRAG))) { > + ? ? ? if (ieee80211_has_morefrags(fc) || > + ? ? ? ? ? (le16_to_cpu(hdr->seq_ctrl) & IEEE80211_SCTL_FRAG)) { > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?rates[1].count = rates[2].count = rates[3].count = 0; > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?rates[1].idx = rates[2].idx = rates[3].idx = 0; > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?rates[0].count = ATH_TXMAXTRY; > -- > 1.6.0.6 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at ?http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Is this a side effect of my NO_ACK retry count patchset accepted earlier? -- Vista: [V]iruses, [I]ntruders, [S]pyware, [T]rojans and [A]dware. :-)