On Monday 05 February 2007 19:08, Jiri Benc wrote: > On Mon, 5 Feb 2007 18:43:06 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote: > > I also think that sending RTS in software is not going to work, > > as the timing can not be guaranteed. And timing is why we do it in > > the first place. If the HW is not capable of sending RTS frames, we > > should not try to emulate them in SW, as it might make the situation > > even worse by messing up the NAVs by wrong timing. > > That's not emulation in the software, it's just similar approach as > with sending fragmented frames - you need (more or less) precise timing > there as well and many cards still want them enqueued one-by-one. The > firmware takes care of the precise timing. The same could apply to RTS > frames (i. e. the firmware recognize them and doesn't send them before > it has the next frame ready).
And even for a "dumb" device like rt2x00 (no firmware for rt2400pci, rt2500pci or rt2500usb) it still has rts capabilities. It is just not capable of creating the frame, but the descriptor has a special field that should be set in case of a rts frame. So that would suggest that the device will treat the frame a little bit different than a regular frame. Ivo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
