All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Tamizh chelvam <tamizhchelvam@codeaurora.org>
Cc: c_traja@qti.qualcomm.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	ath10k@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] cfg80211: Add new NL80211_CMD_SET_BTCOEX_PRIORITY to support BTCOEX
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2017 11:48:50 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1483354130.4596.5.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ae82112880d55451342e7a6e5a47c33f@codeaurora.org>


> > 1) does it even make sense to split it out per AC? wouldn't it be
> > weird
> > if you supported this only for VO and BK, and not the others, or
> > something like that?
> > 
> 
> It has support for BE, VI, management and beacon frames also.
> Or do you meant to say like support only for VO and BK?

I mean - does it make sense for a piece of hardware to support only
VO/BK, without the others? I don't really see how that would make
sense, but maybe I'm missing something?

IOW - why have all these bits rather than just one?

> > 2) Wouldn't it make more sense to define this in nl80211 and just
> > pass the bitmap through to userspace? That would save quite a bit
> > of netlink mangling complexity.
> > 
> 
> Please let me know if the below design/thought is fine to you.
> 
> iw phyX set btcoex_priority <[vi, vo, be, bk, mgmt, beacon]>

That seems fine, but I don't see how the iw command line is relevant to
the question of whether we pass flag attributes or a bitmap??

> By this command user should give one or more than one frame types
> for 
> this btcoex priority,
> we will parse that in "iw" and send as a single bitmap(less than
> 0x64)  to the driver?

Right, and also to nl80211. Why not?

johannes

_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Tamizh chelvam <tamizhchelvam@codeaurora.org>
Cc: c_traja@qti.qualcomm.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	ath10k@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] cfg80211: Add new NL80211_CMD_SET_BTCOEX_PRIORITY to support BTCOEX
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2017 11:48:50 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1483354130.4596.5.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ae82112880d55451342e7a6e5a47c33f@codeaurora.org>


> > 1) does it even make sense to split it out per AC? wouldn't it be
> > weird
> > if you supported this only for VO and BK, and not the others, or
> > something like that?
> > 
> 
> It has support for BE, VI, management and beacon frames also.
> Or do you meant to say like support only for VO and BK?

I mean - does it make sense for a piece of hardware to support only
VO/BK, without the others? I don't really see how that would make
sense, but maybe I'm missing something?

IOW - why have all these bits rather than just one?

> > 2) Wouldn't it make more sense to define this in nl80211 and just
> > pass the bitmap through to userspace? That would save quite a bit
> > of netlink mangling complexity.
> > 
> 
> Please let me know if the below design/thought is fine to you.
> 
> iw phyX set btcoex_priority <[vi, vo, be, bk, mgmt, beacon]>

That seems fine, but I don't see how the iw command line is relevant to
the question of whether we pass flag attributes or a bitmap??

> By this command user should give one or more than one frame types
> for 
> this btcoex priority,
> we will parse that in "iw" and send as a single bitmap(less than
> 0x64)  to the driver?

Right, and also to nl80211. Why not?

johannes

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-02 10:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-08 13:15 [PATCH 0/4] cfg80211: mac80211: BTCOEX feature support c_traja
2016-11-08 13:15 ` c_traja
2016-11-08 13:15 ` [PATCH 1/4] cfg80211: Add support to enable or disable btcoex c_traja
2016-11-08 13:15   ` c_traja
2016-12-05 14:46   ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-05 14:46     ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-07 11:04     ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-12-07 11:04       ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-11-08 13:15 ` [PATCH 2/4] cfg80211: Add new NL80211_CMD_SET_BTCOEX_PRIORITY to support BTCOEX c_traja
2016-11-08 13:15   ` c_traja
2016-12-05 14:49   ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-05 14:49     ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-07 17:59     ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-12-07 17:59       ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-12-13 16:09       ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-13 16:09         ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-16  5:53         ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-12-16  5:53           ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-12-16  9:37           ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-16  9:37             ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-19  8:11             ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-12-19  8:11               ` Tamizh chelvam
2017-01-02 10:48               ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2017-01-02 10:48                 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-05 13:18                 ` Tamizh chelvam
2017-01-05 13:18                   ` Tamizh chelvam
2017-01-05 13:38                   ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-05 13:38                     ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-09 10:10                     ` Tamizh chelvam
2017-01-09 10:10                       ` Tamizh chelvam
2017-01-09 10:36                       ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-09 10:36                         ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-19 13:52                         ` Tamizh chelvam
2017-01-19 13:52                           ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-11-08 13:15 ` [PATCH 3/4] mac80211: Add support to enable or disable btcoex c_traja
2016-11-08 13:15   ` c_traja
2016-11-08 13:15 ` [PATCH 4/4] mac80211: Add support to update btcoex priority value c_traja
2016-11-08 13:15   ` c_traja

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1483354130.4596.5.camel@sipsolutions.net \
    --to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=c_traja@qti.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tamizhchelvam@codeaurora.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.