Return-path: Received: from he.sipsolutions.net ([78.46.109.217]:57536 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755286Ab1ATJyp (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Jan 2011 04:54:45 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFC 1/4] mac80211: support for IEEE80211N in IBSS From: Johannes Berg To: Alexander Simon Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: <201101191438.01161.alexander.simon@saxnet.de> <1295447708.4685.5.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> <1295515469.3693.17.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:54:43 +0100 Message-ID: <1295517283.3693.31.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 09:48 +0000, Alexander Simon wrote: > > Well, then maybe I just discussed this with him -- there's similar code > > building the HT IEs for stations, that code should be shared. > So you mean my patch 2/4? It could work but you would have to change util.c of > course. I was pretty sure you wouldn't have accepted that. Of course I'd accept that :-) Reducing duplicated code is good, and I can deal with patches touching many files. Though it'd be nice to do the necessary refactoring first. A nice touch, btw, would be if you included a diffstat. Maybe you should look at using quilt or git to submit patches which help you automate a lot of things. > Ok, separating cfg from mac. No big deal. I'll have to look how to advertise > something... Look at WIPHY_FLAG_IBSS_RSN in net/wireless and net/mac80211 -- that's how things can be advertised. Also, for this one of course you have NL80211_ATTR_SUPPORT_IBSS_RSN. > But i would appreciate if you could comment on the design of the patch itself. > Basically i just took Benoits approach and made it running. A separate option > for setting channel_type isn't necessary. You could also tell by iw whether to > use HT or not. Or no option at all, a module option ibss_ht etc. Or even setting > full options as hostapd does via iw. I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "a separate option"? With the approach that you've posted patches for you need to tell iw whether you want HT or not, right? johannes