Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 7 Jan 2013 17:54:59 +0100 | From | Stanislaw Gruszka <> | Subject | Re: [ 104/173] rt2x00: Dont let mac80211 send a BAR when an AMPDU subframe fails |
| |
On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 04:04:01PM +0100, Andreas Hartmann wrote: > Ben Hutchings wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-01-07 at 09:10 +0100, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 09:05:32AM +0100, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > >>>> To be clear, I have all of these in the queue: > >>>> > >>>> be03d4a45c09 rt2x00: Don't let mac80211 send a BAR when an AMPDU subframe fails > >>>> 5b632fe85ec8 mac80211: introduce IEEE80211_HW_TEARDOWN_AGGR_ON_BAR_FAIL > >>>> ab9d6e4ffe19 Revert: "rt2x00: Don't let mac80211 send a BAR when an AMPDU subframe fails" > >>>> > >>>> and I'm intending to drop/defer them all. > >>> > >>> Patch 3 is a revert of patch 1 (questioned patch). Please apply all 3 patches, > >>> or only patch 2. > >> > >> No, actually all 3 patches have to be applied. Because last one, except > >> revert, include flag IEEE80211_HW_TEARDOWN_AGGR_ON_BAR_FAIL setting in rt2x00 > >> driver, which make patch 2 work. > > > > Andreas said that that after ab9d6e4ffe19 there was still a regression.
That's not true. There will be no regression after ab9d6e4ffe20. The only thing is that solution is not perfect. But perfect solution require lot of changes i.e. is not -stable appropriate (and does not exist currently).
> > But maybe he was confused. I know I'm confused. > :-)) > > No, the thing is: > rt2800pci misses an appropriate handling of aggregation (which meets the > requirements of mac80211). > > Both workarounds, mine and the new workaround from Stanislaw (which is > nothing more than a restricted version of my initial workaround), work
Your workaround broke STA mode on some environment.
Stanislaw
| |