Hi! Have you tried this out with any hardware just yet?
-adrian On 25 August 2013 07:30, Chenchong Qin <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi! > > This is the latest update. > > * add a simple per vap ratectl statistic tracker and api to update it. > * port irn_capabilities to irs_capabilities in struct ieee80211_rc_stat. > perhaps the capabilities field needs to be within ieee80211_rc_stat as > a per vap atrribute. corresponding updates performed. > * add ieee80211_ratectl_none.h to record common ratectl state. > > Thanks! > > Chenchong > > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Chenchong Qin <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> Here is my latest update. In this update: >> >> * add a new struct, ieee80211_ratectl_node. This is the common state that >> all per node rc >> state, i.e. ieee80211_[amrr|sample]_node, should contains it as the >> first field. It's now used to store >> the capabilities. see below. >> * rename ir_capabilities to irn_capabilities and move it to >> ieee80211_ratectl_node (it contained in >> ieee80211_[amrr|sample]_node). ieee80211_ratectl is readonly, so >> ir_capabilities can't be set. And, >> the capabilities is not a part of rc algo. It seems that it should be >> put in the per node rc state. Interface >> of ieee80211_ratectl_node_init() and its callers are updated. >> References to ir_capabilities are also adapted. >> * add ieee80211_ratectl_[node_is11n|get_rateset] to the ratectl api. rc >> algoes all need these functions. >> * change the naming conversion of IEEE80211_RATECTL_FLAG_*. >> * some errors fixed. >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 12:58 AM, Adrian Chadd <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Hi! >>> >>> So yes, we do need to have a generic way of returning that completion >>> information to the rate control code. >>> >>> I'm all for you churning the rate control API to return a struct >>> ieee80211_rc_info in the complete function and totally just kill arg1/arg2. >>> That forces us to extend ieee80211_rc_info to be "right" for all the >>> drivers. >>> >> >> Do you mean drop arg1/arg2 and pass pointer of ieee80211_rc_info to the >> complete function directly? Or return it >> when complete function return? >> >> >>> What wifi devices do you have there? It looks like we're almost at the >>> point where we can start converting a few things to use the modified rate >>> control API and modules - notably iwn (which won't use the multi-rate retry >>> stuff to begin with - it works "differently"..) and ath (which will use the >>> multi-rate retry stuff and the sample rate control module.) >>> >> >> Yeah, I have an AR9227 device at hand. >> >> And, I also get a question here. The ieee80211_ratetable doesn't get a >> rateCode field. So, how we get the >> ratecode of the non_ht rate? >> >> Thanks! >> >> Chenchong >> >> > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-wireless To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
