Hi Gruszka, On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 01:57 -0700, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > Hi Wey > > On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 14:24:17 -0700 > Wey-Yi Guy <wey-yi.w.guy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > When uCode error condition detected, driver try to perform either > > rf reset or firmware reload in order bring device back to > > working condition. > > > > If rf reset is required and scan is in process, there is no need > > to issue rf reset since scan already reset the rf. > > Yes, and that is already handled by iwl_scan_initiate(). > > > If firmware reload is required and scan is in process, skip the > > reload request. There is a possibility firmware reload during > > scan cause problem. > > If we skip restart request now, next will be scheduled lately (correct?, That is correct, if we still encounter the problem. > I think there are firmware reset requests that are not repeatable). But we > still will have scan pending since firmware is in bad shape and will not > finish scan. So until scan_check delayed work (7s) will not finish scan, > will not be able to reset firmware. I do not think that is what we want. > I think patch is good for .36, but after my current scan patches, it is > not be needed and actually it should be reverted (see below). > Agree, with your recent patch, it improve a lot on how scan abort work. I still don't like the warning, but like you say, it might be ok since we reloading firmware. I will ask John to revert the patch Thanks Wey -- 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
