From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-path: <ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org>
Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([144.76.43.152] helo=sipsolutions.net)
 by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux))
 id 1V4nRv-0000IM-Vs
 for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:37:29 +0000
Message-ID: <1375342617.8608.5.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] introduce chan_time parameter to scan request
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 09:36:57 +0200
In-Reply-To: <1375087158-22077-1-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com>
References: <1375087158-22077-1-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <ath10k.lists.infradead.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/options/ath10k>,
 <mailto:ath10k-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/ath10k/>
List-Post: <mailto:ath10k@lists.infradead.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ath10k-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k>,
 <mailto:ath10k-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: "ath10k" <ath10k-bounces@lists.infradead.org>
Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org
To: Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@tieto.com>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath10k@lists.infradead.org

On Mon, 2013-07-29 at 10:39 +0200, Michal Kazior wrote:

> I'm wondering if it would be okay to set swscan
> probe delay to 0 if chan_time is non-zero? Or does
> probe delay need to be non-zero? Or maybe it
> should also be configurable via a parameter?

probe delay needs to be non-zero for NAV adjustment.

johannes


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