> + *
> + * When hardware connection monitoring is enabled with
> + * IEEE80211_HW_CONNECTION_MONITOR, this function will cause immediate change
> + * to disassociated state, without connection recovery attempts.
Tiny detail: putting a % in front of constants formats them nicer in the
html output.
> +static void ieee80211_beacon_loss_disassoc(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata)
> +{
I can see where you're coming from, but maybe this should be more like
ieee80211_driver_notify_disconnect() or something like that?
> + printk(KERN_DEBUG "Beacon loss from AP %pM, "
> + "disconnected.\n", bssid);
printk lines are allowed to pass 80 chars to make grep easier. Also I
really think this should be more like "Connection to AP %pM lost." or
something like that?
> void ieee80211_beacon_loss_work(struct work_struct *work)
> {
> struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata =
> container_of(work, struct ieee80211_sub_if_data,
> u.mgd.beacon_loss_work);
>
> - ieee80211_mgd_probe_ap(sdata, true);
> + if (sdata->local->hw.flags & IEEE80211_HW_CONNECTION_MONITOR)
> + ieee80211_beacon_loss_disassoc(sdata);
> + else
> + ieee80211_mgd_probe_ap(sdata, true);
> }
And I'm actually wondering now if using the same API is a good idea.
Yes, it makes some sense, but it's quite different yet? Maybe we should
have something like this:
static inline void ieee80211_beacon_loss(hw, vif)
{
WARN_ON(hw->flags & IEEE80211_HW_CONNECTION_MONITOR);
__ieee80211_beacon_connection_loss(vif);
}
static inline void ieee80211_connection_loss(hw, vif)
{
WARN_ON(!(hw->flags & IEEE80211_HW_CONNECTION_MONITOR));
__ieee80211_beacon_connection_loss(vif);
}
to make at least the external API easier to understand?
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
