On 10/20/2011 09:09 AM, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 08:22:55AM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
On 10/20/2011 07:58 AM, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:44:36AM -0700, greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Ben Greear<greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
The ieee80211_cfg_on_oper_channel method compared the
current hardware config as well as the desired hardware
config. In most cases, this is proper, but when deciding
whether to go back on-channel, if the hardware is not
configured on-channel, but logically it *should* be
on-channel, then we must go on-channel.
This patch adds a flag to the ieee80211_cfg_on_oper_channel
logic to disable comparing the actual hardware so we do not
have to create another tricky method with similar logic.
Reported-by: Eliad Peller<eliad@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Ben Greear<greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I much more prefer previous one-line patch from Eliad
http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3c1311607763%2d12603%2d3%2dgit%2dsend%2demail%2deliad%40wizery.com%3e
this one seems to provide unneeded code complexity, but
behaviour i.e. number of channel switches in hardware
is the same.
I believe it's possible to set tmp_channel to NULL and not actually
change the on/off channel configuration, and my patch should allow us to
skip a hardware config in that case.
However, this might only be possible if we are in this code while
scanning, and currently, I don't believe we can be in this work
code while scanning.
So you want to optimize a case that is not even possible at present.
Do you know that "premature optimization is the root of all evil" ? :-)
I was trying to clean out some of the sloppiness in the on/off channel
logic, but in this case, I don't think the extra parania helped much,
and my attempt at cleverness obviously introduced some bugs...
I'm not quite against by that change, but I would like to have -stable
fixes, since bug we are talking about not only annoys people by warning,
but also disallow to associate to wireless network. I prefer that we
apply Eliad patches and cc -stable and do possible further optimization
on top of that (ideally if some measurement will be available that show
optimization really works).
That is fine with me.
Thanks,
Ben
--
Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
--
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
