On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 03:06:23PM +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote:

On 2011-09-29 2:14 PM, Rajkumar Manoharan wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 01:32:03PM +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote:

quoted

On 2011-09-29 1:24 PM, Rajkumar Manoharan wrote:

quoted

Select appropriate rate as highest rate of rate series, if the frame
was asked to be sent at minimum rate. For example nullfunc frames
either can be sent at HT rates on normal case or at non-HT rates if
it is used for connection monitoring.

Signed-off-by: Rajkumar Manoharan<redacted>
---
  drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/rc.c |    4 ++--
  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Shouldn't the check for IEEE80211_TX_CTL_USE_MINRATE be in
rate_control_send_low(), so that it does not have to be repeated in
every single rate control module?

But I donno what could be the side effect of changing rate_control_send_low
as it is used by all drivers. And also if the rate control provide the
minrate, it can be used to update the PER upon tx status. isnt it?

It always updates the PER upon tx status, even if
rate_control_send_low was used. It should work the same way for
every driver, so I think putting this in the ath9k rc is the wrong
place, and it would be weird if a flag with such a generic name as
IEEE80211_TX_CTL_USE_MINRATE would be used by some rate control
modules and ignored by others.

That true. Till now rate_control_send_low never be used for data frame.
So just to be causious, I dicided to process tx_ctl at rate control side.
If it wont break any rate control algo other than ath9k, then I send my
earlier rfc patch. Thanks for your input.

--
Rajkumar