On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 08:09 +0300, Luciano Coelho wrote: > On Sun, 2011-09-18 at 15:03 +0300, Eliad Peller wrote: > > In some cases the driver might want to change the > > default dynamic ps timeout (e.g. coex activity adds > > latency to the rx/tx path, which might result in > > redundant psm entrance). > Let's see what Johannes is going to say about this change in mac80211, > but IIRC this timeout used to exist with WEXT, but it was not > implemented in nl80211. We (at Nokia, probably Juuso) tried to > implement it a long time ago, but after some discussions with Johannes, > it was decided that this value wouldn't be settable from userspace at > least. I don't know if it was considered setting it from the driver > side, though. Yeah it's a good question ... but in this case there actually is some actual reason for it -- I think it's probably used for BT coexist? Obviously the user can't make an informed choice in that scenario, but the device might actually be able to? My biggest objection back then was that the user has no real reason to play with it, and the latency properties of it are better done in other ways. Which actually makes me think that having a completely fixed value from the driver might not be a good thing? I mean, yes, we allow wext to override it, but really we want this to be controlled by the latency requirements I think. That's obviously something of a pipe dream right now since nothing seems to ever use that, but ... So anyway, do we really want this to be completely fixed by the driver? Maybe a range would be better? 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
