Return-path: Received: from nsmtp.uni-koblenz.de ([141.26.64.14]:34586 "EHLO nsmtp.uni-koblenz.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754731AbdIHInv (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Sep 2017 04:43:51 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] wireless: set correct mandatory rate flags To: Johannes Berg , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org References: <20170907154744.28357-1-rschuetz@uni-koblenz.de> <1504853647.6177.8.camel@sipsolutions.net> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Richard_Sch=c3=bctz?= Message-ID: <85930e91-2c1e-53a6-5b65-d796116295fa@uni-koblenz.de> (sfid-20170908_104355_971137_017FDD72) Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 10:43:44 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1504853647.6177.8.camel@sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Am 08.09.2017 um 08:54 schrieb Johannes Berg: > On Thu, 2017-09-07 at 17:47 +0200, Richard Schütz wrote: >> According to IEEE Std 802.11-2016 (16.2.3.4 Long PHY SIGNAL field) >> all of >> the following rates are mandatory for a HR/DSSS PHY: 1 Mb/s, 2 Mb/s, >> 5.5 Mb/s and 11 Mb/s. Set IEEE80211_RATE_MANDATORY_B flag for all of >> these instead of just 1 Mb/s to correctly reflect this. > > Hmm, I guess technically you're correct, since 11b added what's now > Clause 16 (was Clause 18 at the time), and that has all of them > mandatory? But perhaps this was actually intended for Clause 15 > compatibility? Compatibility in what way? -- Richard