On Thu September 30 2010 01:45:08 Ben Greear wrote: > > i made these changes on top of your v7 patch, please tell me what you > > think! and feel free to merge the changes into your patch, if you agree > > with them. > > I'll merge them in and do some quick testing and re-post the full > patch. thanks! > For STAs, I use the can-scan-one logic so that after the first interface > associates, future automated scans will not scan more than the single > channel. That helps keep us on the same channel. > > But, if all interfaces disassociate, then full scans will happen again, > and the first interface to associate gets to choose the channel. > > If the channel is changed for any reason, all of the old stations are > un-associated and attempt full rescan to re-associate. > > That scan-one logic is probably not going into the upstream kernel though, > so to keep confusion to a minimum, you would have to make sure that > your STAs are all configured for APs on the same channel. that makes sense. > In general, APs and STAs have worked well together for us..but we have > never used adhoc. It sounds to me like you know a lot more about this > stuff than I do, so perhaps you can make more progress. maybe, but i'm not sure if i can spend much time on this. as i said i'm fine as long as one ad-hoc interface per device works and if we can have multiple AP interfaces on another device. if someone is interested in ad-hoc + STA or ad-hoc + AP interfaces, basically we would need to test: - can we have the HW in ad-hoc mode and still have AP interfaces? - can we have the HW in ad-hoc mode and still have STA interfaces? - if that's not possible, there have been patches for madwifi, which runs ad- hoc interfaces with the hardware configured in AP mode, but this has some disadvantages (like no TSF sync, no beacon backoff). i'm not sure if we should disable ad-hoc + other interfaces in the mean time or leave it open for others to test??? maybe i can give it a short try today? > If we can get agreement on the patch as is (with your changes included), > I'd love to get it pushed upstream. Then folks can improve it further. sure. i tested v7 + my changes for the last 12 hours, using 2 WPA and 2 non- encrypted AP interfaces with concurrent iperf traffic and ping without problems. one ad-hoc interface works as well. i think the problems i saw last time were due to dupliacte mac addresses. so i'll checkout your v8 patch and then let's see to get it merged! :) bruno -- 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
