On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 11:15:36PM +0530, Björn Smedman wrote: > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 6:33 PM, Rajkumar Manoharan > <rmanoharan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Current ath9k code does not handle beacon timers on opmode > > specific. One such example is that a STA beacon config overwrites > > already configured AP vif's beacon timers during scan. > > > > So select a vif as primary based on opmode and configure that > > vif's bss and beacon config in hw and update the primary vif > > on opmode change, interface up/down and bss info change. > > > > And also while moving back to single STA vif from multi STA vifs, > > power save is enabled and hw has to be reconfigured with proper > > beacon and bssid. Otherwise connection poll will be triggered > > so frequently due to beacon loss. > > It's really nice to see multi-vif beacons get some attention, thanks. :) Thanks. > Just one thought: Is the "opmode" concept really necessary? It's been > discussed previously and I think the conclusion is often that it would > be better to iterate all the current vifs and do something logical > based on that instead of setting an "opmode". > Yes. currently opmode is set based on vif iteration and the changes were merged under "ath9k: Fix up hardware mode and beacons with multiple vifs". And beacon config is filled by doing vif iteration againgt matching opmode. -- Rajkumar > Do you think it would be possible to remove the "opmode" construct > from your patch? Do you think it would be an improvement? > > Björn Smedman -- 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
