linux-wireless.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* radiotap rate no longer supported in mac80211?
@ 2010-06-14 22:18 Steve deRosier
  2010-06-15 20:18 ` Pavel Roskin
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Steve deRosier @ 2010-06-14 22:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-wireless

I'm trying to support per-packet setting of rate on a packet injection
via the radiotap header.  In an earlier version of mac80211 (around
2.6.26), there was code in __ieee80211_parse_tx_radiotap (in
net/mac80211/tx.c) to support the use of the the rate element from the
radiotap header.  In current versions of wireless-testing, most of the
code here has been removed and only the flags are parsed.

I want to return the IEEE80211_RADIOTAP_RATE portion of this function
in order to support this.  So the questions:
1. Why were all fields other than IEEE80211_RADIOTAP_FLAGS removed?
2. Would it be OK for me to prepare and submit a patch to restore the
rate functionality?

Thanks,
- Steve

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: radiotap rate no longer supported in mac80211?
  2010-06-14 22:18 radiotap rate no longer supported in mac80211? Steve deRosier
@ 2010-06-15 20:18 ` Pavel Roskin
  2011-03-30 15:42   ` Roberto Riggio
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Roskin @ 2010-06-15 20:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Steve deRosier; +Cc: linux-wireless

On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 15:18 -0700, Steve deRosier wrote:
> I'm trying to support per-packet setting of rate on a packet injection
> via the radiotap header.  In an earlier version of mac80211 (around
> 2.6.26), there was code in __ieee80211_parse_tx_radiotap (in
> net/mac80211/tx.c) to support the use of the the rate element from the
> radiotap header.  In current versions of wireless-testing, most of the
> code here has been removed and only the flags are parsed.
> 
> I want to return the IEEE80211_RADIOTAP_RATE portion of this function
> in order to support this.  So the questions:
> 1. Why were all fields other than IEEE80211_RADIOTAP_FLAGS removed?
> 2. Would it be OK for me to prepare and submit a patch to restore the
> rate functionality?

I posted a patch that would add rate and retry flags:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/47441

I didn't see any interest in the patch.  Perhaps injecting packets at a
specific rate in not particularly needed.

Also, the patch is somewhat inelegant because of the requirement to
specify the rate when the retry count is specified.

mac80211 has an array of rates with corresponding retry counts.  The
radiotap standard has one rate and one retry count.  This doesn't map
well to the mac80211 approach.  Supporting the retry count without the
rate would require some tricky logic, and I don't know if anyone needs
that.

I don't feel good about pushing a patch that makes the code more complex
without knowing the use case.

-- 
Regards,
Pavel Roskin

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: radiotap rate no longer supported in mac80211?
  2010-06-15 20:18 ` Pavel Roskin
@ 2011-03-30 15:42   ` Roberto Riggio
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Roberto Riggio @ 2011-03-30 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-wireless

Pavel Roskin <proski@...> writes:

> I posted a patch that would add rate and retry flags:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/47441
> 
> I didn't see any interest in the patch.  Perhaps injecting packets at a
> specific rate in not particularly needed.

Well maybe it is a little late to reply to this. Anyway I'm actually using
your patch as part of a custom routing protocol for a mesh based on the roofnet 
code.







^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: radiotap rate no longer supported in mac80211?
  2010-08-05 22:58 ` Qasim Javed
@ 2010-08-06 10:09   ` Daniel Haid
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Haid @ 2010-08-06 10:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-wireless

On 2010-06-15 Pavel Roskin wrote:
> I don't feel good about pushing a patch that makes the code more complex
> without knowing the use case.

I need this as well. How can it be implemented correctly, so that it can
be accepted?

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2011-03-30 15:45 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-06-14 22:18 radiotap rate no longer supported in mac80211? Steve deRosier
2010-06-15 20:18 ` Pavel Roskin
2011-03-30 15:42   ` Roberto Riggio
2010-08-05 14:14 Capturing packets with bad FCS in monitor mode Daniel Haid
2010-08-05 22:58 ` Qasim Javed
2010-08-06 10:09   ` radiotap rate no longer supported in mac80211? Daniel Haid

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).