On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 08:10 +0200, ext Kalle Valo wrote: > Maybe at some point we can talk with QoS framework about this. > > >> I'm mostly worried about timeout 0 case, for example I suspect ath9k > >> is broken with that value. > >> > >> Also does this patch change the default value of dynamic ps timeout? > >> > > > > No, the current default does not change. As the default value for the > > latency is 2000s, we will, by default, get a timeout of 100ms. > > Excellent. Thank you for explaining these. > > From my point of view these patches look good and I have nothing to > complain. You're definitely getting soft. I will stretch my luck by submitting a v3 with one more latency range, giving a dynamic PS timeout of 50 ms. > (I hope Juuso didn't hit his head when falling off from his chair when > reading this.) > *ouch* -Juuso -- 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
