From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1XJcZy-0006FQ-NX for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 06:07:35 +0000 From: Kalle Valo Subject: Re: Support for scan while in AP mode, and offchannel while in AP mode References: <8761hpc9j9.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 09:07:05 +0300 In-Reply-To: (Avery Pennarun's message of "Tue, 19 Aug 2014 01:56:35 -0400") Message-ID: <87wqa5au7q.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: Avery Pennarun Cc: ath10k Avery Pennarun writes: >>> Are there any plans to implement this feature? It's important in >>> order to implement automatic channel change in case of changes in the >>> interference environment. >> >> No plans at the moment. Does anyone know how much work would it be to >> change mac80211 to support this with hw_scan? > > Is there any particular reason it can't just resort to a sw_scan for > this use case? What's the benefit of hw_scan? I'm surprised there > would be any particular CPU time taken for such a thing. For mobile devices hw_scan is important because the ability to allow the host CPU to sleep while scanning. For others I'm not that sure, maybe firmware can do timing better (less intrusive) than host based sw scanning? -- Kalle Valo _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k