Linux wireless drivers development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nl80211: provide minimum scheduled scan (plan) interval
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 11:06:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3fa55a67-4447-9c41-23d2-689db818b60d@broadcom.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1480062330.4317.2.camel@sipsolutions.net>



On 11/25/2016 9:25 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> Sorry, forgot to reply to this until Luca's email bumped it up...
>
> On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 21:06 +0100, Arend Van Spriel wrote:
>
>> Are we? Currently, the minimum is not checked in nl80211, but that
>> does not say anything about the driver which might validate the
>> interval as well and return an error.
>
> Well, since drivers currently don't return an error (even if they
> ignore the value!) that *does* change the API.
>
>> What made me start looking at this is that in brcmfmac the interval
>> in the request was ignored and a fixed interval was provisioned in
>> the device. I wanted to fix that but was not sure if I needed to
>> check it against our firmware min..max range and what the appropriate
>> error handling should be. If silently changing what user-space is
>> requesting is fine for this, I am happy to make it so. Preferably in
>> nl80211.
>
> I think (agreeing with Luca) bumping it up is fine.

Fine by me although the "drift over time" reason seems only more reason 
to have minimum validation mainly because nowhere is nl80211.h it is 
stated that the interval is a "soft" requirement. Now Luca proposes 
bumping to minimum should be done in the driver. What is your opinion?

I will update the kernel doc to clarify what can be expected from the 
interval value.

Regards,
Arend

  reply	other threads:[~2016-11-25 10:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-22 13:31 [PATCH] nl80211: provide minimum scheduled scan (plan) interval Arend van Spriel
2016-11-22 13:38 ` Johannes Berg
2016-11-22 20:06   ` Arend Van Spriel
2016-11-25  8:25     ` Johannes Berg
2016-11-25 10:06       ` Arend van Spriel [this message]
2016-11-25 10:30         ` Luca Coelho
2016-11-25  8:04 ` Luca Coelho

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3fa55a67-4447-9c41-23d2-689db818b60d@broadcom.com \
    --to=arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com \
    --cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luca@coelho.fi \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox