Re: Thoughts about mac80211 client PS implementation

[Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1092 bytes --]

On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 12:00 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:

> > > Maybe we don't want to disable PS for a single frame though
> > 
> > Actually I think we do. The reason why I'm interested in dynamic PS is
> > the receive latency (transmit latency minimal is in practise). For
> > example, let's think about DNS request. In the best scenario only one
> > frame is transmitted, and if we don't come out receiving the reply to
> > the dns request will take a long time. If DTIM is 3 and beacon
> > interval 100 ms, the RTT for the DNS request/reply would be 300 ms.
> > That's a long delay to a case where user has pressed a link in the
> > browser and the browser starts to load a web page.
> 
> Good point. So set my M to 1 and N to 0 ;) Well, in that case you don't
> need a timer at all but can just schedule the work right away.

Another thought I just had: you could catch the frame in
subif_start_xmit, stop the master interface queues, xmit the frame to
the master interface, schedule the PS off work, and after that turns PS
on you wake the master queues.

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]