From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
Cc: linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC V2 1/5] nl80211: allow multiple active scheduled scan requests
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 21:11:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1487103101.6517.1.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e2ec8547-4e0d-881b-5f4e-1e61d4b8b047@broadcom.com> (sfid-20170214_210910_322687_A1E9999F)
On Tue, 2017-02-14 at 21:09 +0100, Arend Van Spriel wrote:
> On 14-2-2017 14:12, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Tue, 2017-02-14 at 14:07 +0100, Arend Van Spriel wrote:
> >
> > > > No. But there was a size limit on how much older userspace
> > > > could
> > > > process before we did the splitting.
> > >
> > > I see. So basically adding stuff to (split_start == 0) is not
> > > wanted.
> >
> > Correct.
>
> Uhm. Now I am staring at the code there and wonder about following.
> Up until (split_start == 7) I see:
>
> state->split_start++;
> if (state->split)
> break;
>
> For the remaining cases the break is unconditional. Any idea how to
> interpret that?
Yeah, actually, adding stuff to anything where split_start < 7 is
therefore not wanted :-)
The thing is that we if no split is accepted by the userspace tool
(state->split is false) then we have to send everything in one big
message. This is everything until split_start == 7, I guess.
After that, there's only new stuff that such old userspace will be
unable to interpret anyway, so the break is then unconditional - old
userspace without split will never see those new capabilities, and new
userspace can deal with the split.
johannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-14 20:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-16 11:42 [RFC V2 0/5] cfg80211: support multiple scheduled scans Arend van Spriel
2017-01-16 11:42 ` [RFC V2 1/5] nl80211: allow multiple active scheduled scan requests Arend van Spriel
2017-01-24 9:40 ` Johannes Berg
2017-02-14 12:35 ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-02-14 12:51 ` Johannes Berg
2017-02-14 13:07 ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-02-14 13:12 ` Johannes Berg
2017-02-14 20:09 ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-02-14 20:11 ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2017-02-15 10:55 ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-02-15 10:59 ` Johannes Berg
2017-02-14 13:33 ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-02-14 13:34 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-16 11:42 ` [RFC V2 2/5] nl80211: include request id in scheduled scan event messages Arend van Spriel
2017-01-16 11:42 ` [RFC V2 3/5] cfg80211: add request id parameter to .sched_scan_stop() signature Arend van Spriel
2017-01-16 11:42 ` [RFC V2 4/5] cfg80211: add request id to cfg80211_sched_scan_results() api Arend van Spriel
2017-01-16 11:42 ` [RFC V2 5/5] cfg80211: add request id in cfg80211_sched_scan_stopped{,_rtnl}() api Arend van Spriel
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=1487103101.6517.1.camel@sipsolutions.net \
--to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.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.