Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> IIRC Juuso added ieee80211_enable/disable_dyn_ps() to make it possible >> use BT COEX with wl12xx. > > A lot has happened since then :) The wl12xx firmware today is vastly > different and much improved. Yeah, quite a turn. That's good :) >> Now you are saying that you actually want the opposite? > > Yes. The firmware is now capable of doing coex without enforcing PSM. > This leads to a much better WLAN TP while BT is on. So we can remove the enable/disable dynps interface soon? >> But nevertheless I'm not still convinced that doing all this in >> mac80211 is the right thing. Especially that this seems to be very >> wl12xx specific, right? > > Not really, why do you consider this wl12xx specific more than any > other hw offloading or mac80211 API that is used by a single driver ? Can we please avoid hand waving and stick to the matter at hand, please? The problem is that the current mac80211 powersave implementation is a HUGE mess and nobody fully understands it nor wants to touch it. We should be trying to simplify that instead of creating it more complex. I actually believe that it's not possible to properly support all the different power save hardware designs out there, instead I think that some of the most eccentric implementations should not be supported by mac80211 at all. For example, waking up for beacons or multicast frames is a good example, we should just rip them out from mac80211 and let drivers deal that crap. Now I try to understand what would be the best option for your requirement. Are there any other drivers which needs this ieee80211_set_dyn_ps_timeout() interface? If there is more than one driver needing, implementing this to mac80211 would make more sense. -- Kalle Valo -- 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
