On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 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? > doesn't dtim=1 is still better than not entering ps at all? i think the only bad effect of using dtim=1 (instead of greater value) is wrt power saving. but entering psm with dtim=1 is still better than not entering psm at all. > 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?) the current behavior is not entering ps if there is no beacon. however, as i've just explained, i think we can drop this requirement. i don't think we should add a warning, as this might be a legitimate behavior (as probe response might be enough in order to connect). Eliad. -- 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
