From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mga14.intel.com ([143.182.124.37]:62104 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751007AbYDVCBG (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Apr 2008 22:01:06 -0400 Subject: Re: [Ipw2100-devel] ipw2200: queue direct scans From: Zhu Yi To: Dan Williams Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ipw2100-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "John W. Linville" In-Reply-To: <1208800153.30994.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1208800153.30994.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:50:43 +0800 Message-Id: <1208829043.5327.13.camel@debian.sh.intel.com> (sfid-20080422_040155_932936_539C7819) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 13:49 -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > When another scan is in progress, a direct scan gets dropped on the > floor. However, that direct scan is usually the scan that's really > needed by userspace, and gets stomped on by all the broadcast scans > the > ipw2200 driver issues internally. Make sure the direct scan happens > eventually, and as a bonus ensure that the passive scan worker is > cleaned up when appropriate. > > The change of request_passive_scan form a struct work to struct > delayed_work is only to make the set_wx_scan() code a bit simpler, > it's > still only used with a delay of 0 to match previous behavior. > > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams I agree with you the idea to split the current active request_scan into active direct scan and active broadcast scan. But can you merge your ipw_request_direct_scan_helper into ipw_request_scan_helper so that we don't duplicate the code? Thanks, -yi