Well just remember you can always ask me/us questions! What's your latest diff against -HEAD? Maybe I can start looking at including parts of it in the tree.
-adrian On 2 August 2013 09:17, Chenchong Qin <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi! > > These days, I'm taking a further look at what Linux done for the > _completion_ of a > frame. Some updates will be posted here later. > > And, with ir_rates, we can return/fill an rc array rather than just > returning the rix. > > Thanks! > > Chenchong > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Adrian Chadd <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Boo! >> >> Do you have another update? >> >> >> >> -adrian >> >> On 24 July 2013 06:44, Adrian Chadd <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On 24 July 2013 06:38, Chenchong Qin <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> My pleasure! >> >> >> >> It's also against HEAD. >> >> >> >> Thanks! >> > >> > Ok. This is looking great! >> > >> > Next - we need to update the rate control API to now populate an rc >> > array rather than just returning the rix. >> > >> > This is the tricky part - as we're going to have to modify all the >> > drivers that use the rate control API to use this. >> > Which is fine, as there's only a handful. It's just annoying. >> > >> > Then we have to provide the rate control information during frame >> > _completion_, so the rate control code knows which transmission rates >> > succeeded or failed. I'm still not sure what to do about it here. >> > Maybe do something like Linux and attach TX rate control and >> > completion information as an mbuf tag? >> > >> > _Then_ we can start doing interesting thing with it. :) >> > >> > >> > >> > -adrian > > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-wireless To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
