On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 12:00 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > Maybe we don't want to disable PS for a single frame though > > > > Actually I think we do. The reason why I'm interested in dynamic PS is > > the receive latency (transmit latency minimal is in practise). For > > example, let's think about DNS request. In the best scenario only one > > frame is transmitted, and if we don't come out receiving the reply to > > the dns request will take a long time. If DTIM is 3 and beacon > > interval 100 ms, the RTT for the DNS request/reply would be 300 ms. > > That's a long delay to a case where user has pressed a link in the > > browser and the browser starts to load a web page. > > Good point. So set my M to 1 and N to 0 ;) Well, in that case you don't > need a timer at all but can just schedule the work right away. Another thought I just had: you could catch the frame in subif_start_xmit, stop the master interface queues, xmit the frame to the master interface, schedule the PS off work, and after that turns PS on you wake the master queues. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
