From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-ea0-f181.google.com ([209.85.215.181]:40695 "EHLO mail-ea0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755977Ab3IKTAJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Sep 2013 15:00:09 -0400 Received: by mail-ea0-f181.google.com with SMTP id d10so4880866eaj.12 for ; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 12:00:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Christian Lamparter To: Oleksij Rempel Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: correct way to reduce traffic needed for LED triggering Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 21:00:05 +0200 Message-ID: <2087752.rTT3R1h3WM@debian64> (sfid-20130911_210022_953524_31302F7F) In-Reply-To: <5230B721.40104@rempel-privat.de> References: <5230B721.40104@rempel-privat.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wednesday 11 September 2013 20:32:01 Oleksij Rempel wrote: > what is correct way to reduce IO needed for LED blinking? I did it with > ieee80211_queue_delayed_work(.., &priv->led-work, msecs_to_jiffird(HZ)); > > or are there other way to regulate it? Yes, you can offload some "blinking" overhead by implementing blink_set in led_classdev (aka "priv->led_cdev"). (Of course, you'll have to add the "blink" routines into the FW. But that shouldn't be much of a problem). If you need some inspiration: rt2x00, iwlegacy and iwlwifi are using blink_set. Regards, Christian