From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from nbd.name ([46.4.11.11]:46686 "EHLO nbd.name" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753064Ab1BFTmX (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Feb 2011 14:42:23 -0500 Message-ID: <4D4EF99D.5020601@openwrt.org> Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 20:42:21 +0100 From: Felix Fietkau MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ben Greear CC: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Scanning and channel types. References: <4D4EF004.3040109@candelatech.com> In-Reply-To: <4D4EF004.3040109@candelatech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2011-02-06 8:01 PM, Ben Greear wrote: > Current code always sets the channel type to NO_HT when scanning. > > From what I can tell, we should be able to send NO_HT packets on > any channel type, and for passive scanning, it should not matter > at all what channel-type we are using. > > I tested relaxing scanning to use the current channel type > when scanning on the operating channel, and it seems to > work. > > Does anyone see any problems with this approach? One thing you should make sure is that once you're done associating to an NO_HT or HT20 AP (and you have no other interfaces to consider), the channel mode must not be HT40 - otherwise it could reduce throughput. - Felix