From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.172]:40302 "EHLO ns3.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751805Ab2BQQNa (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Feb 2012 11:13:30 -0500 Message-ID: <4F3E7CA5.7010207@candelatech.com> (sfid-20120217_171334_128038_3AC27A65) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 08:13:25 -0800 From: Ben Greear MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Johannes Berg CC: linux-wireless Subject: Re: [RFT/FYI] mac80211: revert on-channel work optimisations References: <1320772222.24797.22.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> <4EB96416.5040700@candelatech.com> (sfid-20111108_181718_795911_9F0A2B63) <1329493491.3786.6.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> In-Reply-To: <1329493491.3786.6.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 02/17/2012 07:44 AM, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 09:17 -0800, Ben Greear wrote: >> On 11/08/2011 09:10 AM, Johannes Berg wrote: >>> FYI -- I'm going to test this a bit more but I am going to put it in. >>> The code is a mess -- look at how much code I remove below (and that's >>> after everybody elses cleanups!) for a dubious optimisation. >>> >>> I agree that we should address this and we need to really do this to not >>> mess up our aggregation state, but the current code is too complex and >>> causing too many issues. We also need to think about this in the context >>> of multi-virtual-channel support. >> >> Well crap. Why don't you try to fix it right instead? >> >> I'll probably end up carrying this in my own tree so >> that multiple vifs work well and don't constantly >> reset the ath9k causing it to shit itself... > > Given the auth/assoc redesign that went in now, are you still carrying > this? Does the redesign address your problem? I haven't looked yet...still stuck back on 3.0 kernel for the most part. I should be moving to 3.3 sometime soon, and will see how it works. I was thinking that I would ignore the work logic for now and probably just focus on re-applying the on-channel scan optimization first. Are you done, or mostly done with the re-architecture you were working on? I know you didn't like the scan optimization from before...do you have any ideas on how it might be done more to your liking? Thanks, Ben > > johannes -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com