Sorry - needed some time to think through this thread again. > I think it is a moot point as far as this change goes: Regardless of > whether the NIC should or not, it _does_. So, mis-reporting it up > the stack only hides the issue and does not even give the user a clue > that on-the-air encoding may be slightly off-spec.
Arguably, reporting something that *seems* sane, like this patch does, will do more to hide it than reporting 0 which is clearly bogus, no? I realize you were replying to whether or not the *driver* should "misreport" it, but the same argument applies the other way here, imho. > If the on-air encoding is an issue, then we need to hack the firmware > to disable this 'feature', but that is a completely separate issue. I guess it trusts rate control enough to try, and if it cannot be received by a spec-abiding receiver, it won't use it due to the failures ... not such a big deal I guess, even though it's odd. Does /anyone/ know why the spec disallowed it? Perhaps those "system" people you refer to? > Once this patch goes in, someone might consider properly reporting > CCK rx rates for 5Ghz band too: ath10k can do this 'feature' as > well, at least in some firmware. Probably can reproduce by sending > off-channel mgt frames on 5Ghz when associated on 2.4, or something > similar to this. I was using ath9k as sniffer when I found this long > ago, so at least ath9k needs the change.... I don't see how this is related? It's not advertising those rates, so it probably also can't use/report them as far as mac80211 and the rest of the stack are concerned. johannes
