> On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Krishna Chaitanya > <chaitanya.mgit@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Emmanuel Grumbach <egrumbach@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 11:24 PM, Chaitanya T K <chaitanya.mgit@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> > The interface loop identifies the no of static and dynamic >>> > smps chains, but overwrites their values across the VIF's >>> > (assuming there are more than one, in my case its AP and STA >>> > loopback), so the driver might not intimated about this update >>> > of SMPS mode, is the value is same. >>> > >>> > So inform driver for every VIF. >>> > >>> > For Ex: STA's SMPS state is changed, but in the loop AP appears >>> > at the last, SMPS state of AP is unchanged hence not intimated >>> > to the driver. >>> > >>> > Signed-off-by: Chaitanya T K <chaitanya.mgit@xxxxxxxxx> >>> > --- >>> >>> But the dynamic / static chains number is a property of the channel >>> context. If you have several vifs on the same channel context, the >>> maximum number of dynamic / static chains will be assigned to the >>> channel context. In short, I think that mac80211 already does the job >>> of taking all the parameters into account and putting the right value >>> into the channel context? >>> I don't really see what bug you are trying to solve - could you please >>> tell us exactly what is your configuration? >>> What SMPS do you have for each interface and what dynamic / static >>> chains settings does mac80211 end up with? >> >> Agree this looks good in channel context angle. >> >> Lets say we have two VIF's one AP and one STA and the driver doesn't >> support channel context's so in that case the config will happen >> through hw_config but the problem is hw_config is out side the loop >> so the config will happen with the parameters of the last VIF, which >> is incorrect. > > Same applies if the driver doesn't support channel contexts. hw_config > will be called with the correct local->smps_mode based on the number > of channels required by each one of the vifs? s/channels/chains/ > I don't see why only the last vif will be taken into account: the loop > computes the maximum number of antenna requires by *all* the vifs. > What am I missing here? -- 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
