Johannes Berg wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 18:49 +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
If we receive a frame, but don't send any, we'll still stay awake.
Should receiving update the dynamic timer as well, to avoid that case?
Here, I mean:
@@ -1816,9 +1851,24 @@ static void ieee80211_rx_mgmt_beacon(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata,
...
+ if (local->hw.conf.dynamic_ps_timeout > 0) {
+ local->hw.conf.flags &= ~IEEE80211_CONF_PS;
+ ieee80211_hw_config(local,
+ IEEE80211_CONF_CHANGE_PS);
+ ieee80211_send_nullfunc(local, sdata, 0);
You mean case where directed_time is set, dynamic_ps_timeout is zero
and station doesn't transmit anything? That's not a problem because in
that case power save is not disabled at all, ps-poll is sent while
power save mode is enabled. So there won't any problem.
No, I mean in the timeout > 0 case, what vivek mentioned too. We never
go back to sleep unless we send a packet.
First of all, this patchset doesn't change the logic for timeout > 0
case. But that case was working already earlier, here's my analysis:
1. tim bit is set
2. if timeout > 0 disable power save and send null frame
3. null frame enables dynamic_ps_timer in ieee80211_master_start_xmit()
4. after dynamic_ps_timer triggers, power save is enabled again
I understood that this was the reason why Vivek moved the running of
dynamic_ps_timer from subif to the master interface. Or did I miss
something?
Kalle
--
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
