On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 16:33 +0100, Helmut Schaa wrote: > > > Kalle, Johannes, how is the listen_interval handled in the > powersave > > > code? > > > Are we only sleeping for one beacon interval or are we ignoring > the > > > listen_interval currently. > > > > I figured this listen interval stuff would come back to bite us at > some > > point. I don't think we should negotiate a listen interval of 1. > OTOH, > > I'm not convinced that all APs would reject it with a status code of > 51 > > if it's too large? Or is that tested anywhere like WFA? > > No idea. However for iwlwifi for example we always used a listen > interval > of 20 any I never saw any associations getting rejected because of > this. > > So maybe we could just increase the default to something between 5 and > 10 to be on the safe side? Yeah, maybe. Could it be useful for userspace to ask for a specific value with assoc? Though I'm not really sure what it would use ... 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
