On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 09:47 -0700, Amitkumar Karwar wrote: > "iw coalesce add" was used, because command for adding multiple rules > at the same time will be a bit lengthy(user will need to enter > multiple lists of packet patterns) and syntax check in iw will also > need some efforts. I think that this is so much unlike all other nl80211 settings where they're either refused or replace previous ones entirely that I would rather not have it. Take connecting for instance, wext allowed you to set all parameters one by one, etc. This is a bit similar. Also, this disallows doing checks on the entire configuration easily. Personally, I see iw as a bit of a test tool so I'm not too concerned about its sometimes odd command line, but I know giving it lots of things can be awkward. For TCP wakeup, I've made it parse a small file, maybe that's an option here as well? > > Otherwise you're going to have very awkward races and need > > to always clear etc. The code would also be easier, though obviously > > you'd need to be able to specify multiple rules at the same time. > > For "iw coalesce set" also user needs to always clear the settings > using "iw coalesce disable". Also similar to "coalesce set", for > "coalesce add" we clear the settings and free allocations while > unloading the driver. > > Please let us know if you prefer "coalesce set" over "coalesce add". I would much prefer just having set/clear over piecewise configuration. johannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
