Search Linux Wireless

Re: wireless powersaving (in NM?)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 21:06 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:

> > > I'm just worried that we'll require a whole bunch of different
> > > interfaces. Yes, in theory there isn't much to control, but iwlwifi
> > > firmware for example can, as far as I interpret the code, dynamically
> > > vary the listen interval.
> > 
> > You mean the wakeup interval? For me, listen interval means the
> > maximum time AP is willing to buffer frames for a STA.
> 
> No, I mean the listen interval in the assoc request frame.

...

> > I think stlc45xx/p54 even had something
> > similar. But honestly, I don't know if this kind of trickery is
> > useful. Why not directly go to the longest wakeup interval
> > immediately?
> 
> But listen interval * beacon interval determines latency.

although, of course, the listen interval in the assoc request is just
the local max -- since the AP already sets the TIM bit as soon as it has
data buffered we can wake up earlier if we want to.

In a sense, therefore, the listen interval determines the maximum
latency we and the AP are willing to put up with.

johannes

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Host AP]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Kernel]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux