On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 8:48 AM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 11:31 -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > >> Yeah, sounds OK. Just to be clear, problems with this code will appear >> on a *per-AP* basis, not a per-card basis, right? ie there are some >> stupid APs that won't work with it, but it won't be the case that a >> chipset will be broken for all APs, right? > > Right. If a particular chipset doesn't properly supported PS then we > shouldn't actually support it at all -- but we cannot know if the AP is > broken. How about leaving it to the supplicant to guess if the AP is borked or not. Kalle, what would happen with these broken APs? If we can determine this through some heuristics then we can label such BSSes as borked in the supplicant and then the user won't have to worry about this. This would only be dealt with each BSS once at most as we would have saved the AP's power save borkedness after our first determination of this. If one wants to do manual debugging you can simple add the flag through the supplicant for the bss. Just don't see the need to confuse a user with an option if we can get away with figuring it out if possible. Luis -- 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
