On Sat, 2011-02-19 at 15:39 +0530, Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan wrote: > On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 03:26:30PM +0530, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Sat, 2011-02-19 at 15:19 +0530, Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 02:54:00PM +0530, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > On Sat, 2011-02-19 at 01:13 -0800, Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan wrote: > > > > > When op_flush() is called with no drop (drop=false), the driver > > > > > tries to tx as many frames as possible in about 100ms on every > > > > > hw queue. During this time period frames from sw queue are also > > > > > scheduled on to respective hw queue. > > > > > > > > Given how long HW queues currently are, I wouldn't set the timeout to > > > > 100ms -- mac80211 has no expectation how long this will take, although > > > > 100ms seems pretty long I'm not sure it'll always be sufficient? > > Would not having a long timeout for flush affect bg scanning by > applications (scan time out)?. In theory, yes. In practise, if the timeout is so low, your application is not going to work right anyway :) 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
