From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:45061 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750938AbXJVPqq (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:46:46 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipw2100: send WEXT scan events From: Dan Williams To: Zhu Yi Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ipw2100-devel@lists.sourceforge.net In-Reply-To: <1193041255.3069.164.camel@debian.sh.intel.com> References: <1192033687.9739.39.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1193041255.3069.164.camel@debian.sh.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:46:27 -0400 Message-Id: <1193067987.30205.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> (sfid-20071022_164649_110074_A7555F4A) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2007-10-22 at 16:20 +0800, Zhu Yi wrote: > On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 12:28 -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > > ipw2100 wasn't sending WEXT scan events at all on scan completion. > > And > > like ipw2200, the driver aggressively auto-scans, requiring > > non-user-requested scan events to be batched together and sent at > > specific intervals instead of many times per seconds. > > > > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams > > Sorry for the late response. Please see my comments below. > > > + queue_delayed_work(priv->workqueue, > > + &priv->scan_event_later, > > + round_jiffies(msecs_to_jiffies(4000))); > > round_jiffies_relative instead? Yeah, that patch hit after I posted mine. Can fix up. > > @@ -6118,6 +6153,8 @@ static struct net_device > > *ipw2100_alloc_device(struct pci_dev *pci_dev, > > INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&priv->wx_event_work, > > ipw2100_wx_event_work); > > INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&priv->hang_check, ipw2100_hang_check); > > INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&priv->rf_kill, ipw2100_rf_kill); > > + INIT_WORK(&priv->scan_event_now, ipw2100_scan_event_now); > > + INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&priv->scan_event_later, > > ipw2100_scan_event_later); > > Except the work vs. delayed_work, they are doing the same thing. So you > can replace scan_event_now by scan_event_later with delay = 0. Good catch, will post update. Thanks! Dan