Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/3] mac80211: decrease execution of the associated timer

[Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2188 bytes --]

On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 18:37 +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Currently the timer is triggering every two seconds
> (IEEE80211_MONITORING_INTERVAL). Decrease the timer to only trigger when
> nothing is received to avoid waking up CPU.
> 
> Now there's a functional change that probe requests are sent only when the
> data path is idle, earlier they were sent also while there was activity
> on the data path.
> 
> This is also preparation for beacon filtering support. Thanks to Johannes
> Berg for the idea.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kalle.valo@nokia.com>
> ---
> 
>  net/mac80211/ieee80211_i.h |    1 +
>  net/mac80211/mlme.c        |    7 +++++++
>  net/mac80211/rx.c          |    3 +++
>  3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/mac80211/ieee80211_i.h b/net/mac80211/ieee80211_i.h
> index d06c757..7851135 100644
> --- a/net/mac80211/ieee80211_i.h
> +++ b/net/mac80211/ieee80211_i.h
> @@ -1078,6 +1078,7 @@ void ieee80211_dynamic_ps_timer(unsigned long data);
>  void ieee80211_send_nullfunc(struct ieee80211_local *local,
>  			     struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata,
>  			     int powersave);
> +void ieee80211_rx_trigger(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata);

I think that could have a better name maybe? _sta_rx_notify?

>  void ieee80211_wake_queues_by_reason(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
>  				     enum queue_stop_reason reason);
> diff --git a/net/mac80211/mlme.c b/net/mac80211/mlme.c
> index 5a49779..b3caac0 100644
> --- a/net/mac80211/mlme.c
> +++ b/net/mac80211/mlme.c
> @@ -911,6 +911,13 @@ static void ieee80211_associate(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata)
>  	mod_timer(&ifmgd->timer, jiffies + IEEE80211_ASSOC_TIMEOUT);
>  }
>  
> +void ieee80211_rx_trigger(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata)
> +{
> +	if (sdata->vif.type == NL80211_IFTYPE_STATION) {
> +		mod_timer(&sdata->u.mgd.timer,
> +			  jiffies + IEEE80211_MONITORING_INTERVAL);
> +	}

Should we have the sta check outside the function? Seems a little odd to
have a check in a file that only contains STATION mode code.

Other than that, looks good to me. I'd have thought this would be more
complicated :)

johannes

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