On Fri, 2016-08-12 at 11:34 +0000, Undekari, Sunil Dutt wrote: > > > > The clarification that it also represents the minimum for a single > > beacon interval would make some sense to me, but at the same time > > it can't be used only for that, so perhaps separating a minimum out > > >(rather than using the hard-coded minimum of 10) would make sense. > Sorry . Could not get your statement above . > Are you saying to not check if the beacon interval is < 10 in > cfg80211_validate_beacon_int rather only consider > 10000 and do the > validation if the configured beacon interval is less than > diff_beacon_int_gcd_min , when configured ? > If yes , how do you want the validation for the BI ( < 10 ) for the > first interface to happen ? I was just thinking out loud :) Right now we verify that it's >=10, but does that make sense if say min_gcd is 20? Mathematically, defining gcd(n)=n would make sense, so if you just had a single interface, applying the min_gcd would mean that this is also the minimum beacon interval. We can still leave the <10 check, but if the min_gcd is set treat just a single interface with beaconing with the above gcd() definition and check that the beacon interval is >= min_gcd? Really that just means extending the function to calculate the GCD to be able to return a value for a single number. But maybe I'm overdesigning this :) 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
