Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 08:57:27 -0400
From: "John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>
To: Valentin Manea <linux-wireless@mrs.ro>
Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@gmail.com>,
	David Ross <dave@antacs.com>, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: mac80211 and broadcast frames
Message-ID: <20090708125727.GC4253@tuxdriver.com>
References: <4A49EEC3.3060108@mrs.ro> <43e72e890906300920j1963ae07v800468db9a908a1@mail.gmail.com> <4A4B056B.9000602@mrs.ro> <43e72e890907011033r52c4256dtecf603f56213a825@mail.gmail.com> <4A530131.9050207@mrs.ro> <4A532D3C.5060601@antacs.com> <20090707144851.GA2768@tuxdriver.com> <43e72e890907070915y5fd131b7l6aa845a0785f8c76@mail.gmail.com> <4A544B15.8030106@mrs.ro>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
In-Reply-To: <4A544B15.8030106@mrs.ro>
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:30:29AM +0300, Valentin Manea wrote:
>
>
> On 07/07/2009 07:15 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 7:48 AM, John W. Linville<linville@tuxdriver.com>  wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 09:10:52PM +1000, David Ross wrote:
>>>> Actually it is required to be a mutual BASIC rate (not extended rates) -
>>>> not necessarily the "lowest possible" - David.
>>> True, but FWIW I think all of our rate scaling algorithms choose the
>>> lowest rate.
>>
>> And then iwlwifi and ath9k have their own rate control algo, and at
>> least ath9k uses the lowest valid rate IIRC.
>>
>>    Luis
>
>
>   I've found the code in ath9k and you are right, it always chooses the  
> lowest rate.
>   So, basically to transmit multicast frames at a better bitrate I have  
> to hack the rate control algorithm, right?

Yes.  Feel free to suggest patches for all of the available (i.e. both
generic and device-dependent) algorithms as well.

John
-- 
John W. Linville		Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@tuxdriver.com			might be all we have.  Be ready.
			?Viva Honduras Libre!