From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-bw0-f228.google.com ([209.85.218.228]:56201 "EHLO mail-bw0-f228.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751911AbZGPJiw (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jul 2009 05:38:52 -0400 Received: by bwz28 with SMTP id 28so1933727bwz.37 for ; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 02:38:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Helmut Schaa To: "linux-wireless" Subject: Further improvements to the software scan implementation Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 11:38:58 +0200 Cc: Johannes Berg , Luis Rodriguez MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: <200907161138.58874.helmut.schaa@gmail.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi, as already discussed with Johannes we can further optimize the scan implementation by allowing (on an active channel) to send probes as soon as any other frame is received (and updated the NAV) instead of ever waiting 30ms. Another optimization I thought of while reading [1] would be to take the same approach as Intel in their ucode. If a frame is received while scanning a passive channel switch to active scan mode and send out probes. That should allow us to shorten the time needed to stay on that channel. Luis, do you think this is ok in regard to regulatory restrictions? Thanks, Helmut [1] http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=200907061428.55840.jung%40ecos.de&forum_name=ipw3945-devel