From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:40092 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756428AbYDVDA1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Apr 2008 23:00:27 -0400 Subject: Re: [Ipw2100-devel] ipw2200: queue direct scans From: Dan Williams To: Zhu Yi Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ipw2100-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "John W. Linville" In-Reply-To: <1208829043.5327.13.camel@debian.sh.intel.com> References: <1208800153.30994.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1208829043.5327.13.camel@debian.sh.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 22:56:36 -0400 Message-Id: <1208832996.4232.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> (sfid-20080422_050118_561655_2ABF72D6) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 09:50 +0800, Zhu Yi wrote: > 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? Sure, can give that a shot. Dan