Eliad Peller <eliad@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > beacon_ies is needed only in order to extract the dtim > period. However, even if it's missing we can still enter > ps with dtim=1 (which also happens if the TIM ie is invalid). > > Most drivers don't use conf.max_sleep_period/ps_dtim_period > anyway, and this check prevents them from entering ps if > they don't have beacon (but only probe response), even though > the beacon is not needed at all. Does this increase the chances of accidentally using dtim 1 even though AP has dtim > 1? I'm just worried that it's difficult to detect cases when we are forcing dtim to 1 and nobody might not notice it. How often will this happen? Should we add a warning message for that case? Or few years ago we talked about waiting for a beacon before enabling ps mode, should we reconsider that? (Or maybe it's implemented already?) -- 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
