Hi Wey
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 08:18:20AM -0700, Guy, Wey-Yi wrote:
> > IWL_WARN(priv,
> > "Requested user TXPOWER %d below lower limit %d.\n",
> > @@ -1226,6 +1228,12 @@ int iwl_set_tx_power(struct iwl_priv *priv, s8 tx_power, bool force)
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
> >
> > + if (test_bit(STATUS_SCANNING, &priv->status)) {
> > + priv->tx_power_next = tx_power;
> > + IWL_DEBUG_INFO(priv, "Deferring tx power set while scanning\n");
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > +
[snip]
> > /* Since setting the TXPOWER may have been deferred while
> > * performing the scan, fire one off */
> > - iwl_set_tx_power(priv, priv->tx_power_user_lmt, true);
> > + iwl_set_tx_power(priv, priv->tx_power_next, true);
Doh, this patch introduce a bug, when tx_power_next is not set (because
there was no scan during set_tx_power), but then when someone request
a scan and it finish, tx_power_next is written to hardware. I should
read tx_power using device sysfs not iwconfig when testing, will fix
that.
> Looks good, the only thing is if priv->tx_power_user_lmt ==
> priv->tx_power_next, we don't even have to call set_tx_power, but I
> guess calling it won't hurt, so its your decision check or not.
I'll will call iwl_set_tx_power( ... , false); what seems to be right
thing to do.
Stanislaw
--
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
