[ath9k-devel] vifs management

[Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>]

On 11/02/2010 11:43 AM, Jo?o Maur?cio wrote:
> Without PS, how can the client stay associated with each of the
> different APs?
>
> What I'm trying to do is create, for instance, 2 vifs, each one
> associated to a different AP and manually (or not) control which is
> "active" at a time. In my mind, in order to stay associated with the 2
> APs without packet loss, 1 of the vifs should send a fake PS=1 frame to
> its AP and the other should operate normally. Then, if a "switching
> order" comes in, the operating vif should send its own fake PS=1 frame
> to the corresponding AP and the "sleeping" one should send a PS=0 frame
> to its AP, receiving all the buffered packets.
> Isn't that the logic? I'm really getting confused :S.

My method assumes that all your stations will be on the same
frequency.  When that is the case, two different VIFS can communicate
to two different APs concurrently.  You do not have to play any
special tricks.

If you want your VIFs to function on different channels, then you
are going to have to attempt virtual wiphys probably..and my initial
attempt at using them went poorly.

> Ben Greear wrote:
>  > We have had good luck (assuming you are running the latest code +
>  > the tx-side locking that is yet to make it into wireless-testing)
>  > with creating and using lots of virtual stations on a single
>  > phy.
>
> Yup, I'm running the latest code, but what do you mean about "tx-side
> locking"?
> Also, I don't want to use lots of virtual stations, I guess that 3 would
> be nice.

Sure...we've been testing with 100+ to flush out bugs, but a smaller number is certainly
valid.

I'm not sure all of the tx DMA patches are upstream yet, but they should
be there soon.

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com