Re: [PATCH v6] cfg80211: Provision to allow the support for different beacon intervals

[Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>]

Hi,

Sorry - missed that mail somehow.

> cfg80211_validate_beacon_int -> cfg80211_iter_combinations shall be
> invoked for the interface combinations , currently.
> diff_beacon_int_gcd_min is applicable for the interface combinations
> and am not sure how can we validate this for a single interface .
> This specific interface can be part of two different groups (
> interface combinations) with different values for
> "diff_beacon_int_gcd_min". 
> I don't think we can get the match for the right set of combination
> here , isn't ? 

Well if you have just a single interface, any combination that contains
it is valid, so you'd just continue?

I *think* the code works by checking if any combination applies to the
currently desired state, and rejects if no combination is possible,
that would still be perfectly reasonable here, no?

> To make things simple , can we ignore the following rule 
> " When >0, any beacon interval must also be bigger than this value." 
> and rather have only the following one ? 
> " When >0, different beacon intervals must have a GCD that's at least
> as big as this value."  (To be more precise , any second interface
> which does not meet this rule , will fail to start ) .

Yeah, I suppose we could, but does that really make sense? If you can
have a smaller BI, then you could as well have a smaller GCD, no?

johannes