On Mon, 2011-01-31 at 13:49 +0200, Arik Nemtsov wrote: > On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 13:24, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > It'd be nicer if you could separate out mac80211 patches, but then Luca > > needs to hold off merging until John picked up the mac80211 patch. > > Yea that would complicate matters a bit. Does the ordering of the > patches bother you? It just makes it more complicated for me to pick out the right thing -- I almost missed that there was a mac80211 patch in this huge series. > > Also, come to think of it, the ieee80211_sta_block_awake will not be > > effective I think? Or will it? > > Haven't noticed any adverse effects. ap_sta_ps_end() still checks if > the station is blocked before delivering queued packets. > > Also is should be pretty hard to find a driver that uses both mechanisms. > If it wants to block a station from waking up, it can simply not call > ieee80211_sta_ps_transition(). > > Should work though. Good point, thanks for looking. 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
