From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.172]:37996 "EHLO ns3.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752839Ab1EJUqj (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 May 2011 16:46:39 -0400 Message-ID: <4DC9A423.3050906@candelatech.com> (sfid-20110510_224658_250638_A71FC57D) Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 13:46:27 -0700 From: Ben Greear MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sbrown@cortland.com CC: Johannes Berg , "John W. Linville" , linux-wireless Subject: Re: [PATCH] cfg80211: restrict AP beacon intervals References: <1304959275.12202.4.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> <4DC81A61.9080101@candelatech.com> <1304959783.12202.7.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> <1304961656.2615.9.camel@mythtv.ewol.com> In-Reply-To: <1304961656.2615.9.camel@mythtv.ewol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 05/09/2011 10:20 AM, Steve Brown wrote: > On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 18:49 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: >> On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 09:46 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: >>> On 05/09/2011 09:41 AM, Johannes Berg wrote: >>>> From: Johannes Berg >>>> >>>> Multiple virtual AP interfaces can currently try >>>> to use different beacon intervals, but that just >>>> leads to problems since it won't actually be done >>>> that way by drivers. Return an error in this case >>>> to make sure it won't be done wrong. >>> >>> I think there is no problem with having different beacon >>> intervals, as long as they are all a multiple of >>> the smallest interval and the driver does things properly. >>> >>> I'm not sure ath9k or ath5k currently supports this properly, >>> but there was a patch floating around for a while that did >>> this for ath9k I think... >> >> If you really care greatly about having different beacon intervals (and >> I don't see why you would?) then maybe you can think how we can enforce >> and advertise that to userspace. For now, I'm more comfortable just >> restricting it. >> >> johannes > > I posted a patch for different beacon intervals to the ath9k list last > Jan. This was to allow both a mesh (interval 1000) and ap (interval 100) > vif on the same radio. This combination seems useful, at least for me. Could you re-post this against latest wireless-testing? I should be able to do some testing on this and maybe we can get it pushed upstream... Ben > > Steve -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com