linux-wireless.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] mac80211 scanning restructuring
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 14:45:16 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FF75C6C.9030108@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1341610508.16893.26.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net>

On 07/06/2012 02:35 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 14:30 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
>> On 07/06/2012 02:05 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
>>> I decided that with multi-channel coming and thus us using more
>>> virtual interfaces, the scanning code was going to be the first
>>> victim of some factoring ;-)
>>>
>>> Please review. The only thing that isn't quite clear to me is
>>> whether or not I can really remove the channel == oper_channel
>>> check, but it's only applied to probe resp/beacon frames so it
>>> seems a bit pointless to try to keep it?
>>
>> For what it's worth, I don't see any problems with the patches.
>
> :-)
> I think you should see much fewer calls to cfg80211 with this when
> beacons are received, when you have many virtual interfaces, but I'm not
> sure how you'd see that unless you carefully measure CPU utilization.
>
>> Another enhancement I was thinking about would be to allow
>> vifs to piggy-back on other vif's scans.  Instead of
>> returning EBUSY when another vif is already scanning, just
>> register to receive the scanning vif's results when it finishes.
>
> Hmm, yes, technically that's possible. However, you'd have to verify
> that it used exactly the same scan parameters, which seems like a lot of
> overhead? Given that we give you the scan parameters in the nl80211
> event when the scan finishes (at least I think we do), you could even do
> this optimisation in userspace, when -EBUSY is returned?

I was thinking to only enable the wait-for-peer-scan logic if
peer and requested scans are 'normal', or some simple subset of
mostly-normal that is easy to check for.  It would still always
be valid to return EBUSY if you cannot obviously share scan results.

Main issue that I see is that if one interface is constantly scanning
in wpa_supplicant because it can't find what it's looking for,
you can often get a failure if you manually run 'iw scan'
on the command line, and that is exactly when you often DO want
to see some manual scan results :)

I've already optimized wpa_supplicant to share scans in user-space
some time back (and code has been upstream for a while), and that is
a big help..but doesn't help non-supplicant programs.

Thanks,
Ben

>
> johannes
>


-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com




      reply	other threads:[~2012-07-06 21:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-07-06 21:05 [RFC 0/3] mac80211 scanning restructuring Johannes Berg
2012-07-06 21:05 ` [RFC 1/3] mac80211: make scan_sdata pointer usable with RCU Johannes Berg
2012-07-08 16:27   ` Arik Nemtsov
2012-07-09  7:59     ` Johannes Berg
2012-07-09  8:48       ` Arik Nemtsov
2012-07-09  9:10         ` Johannes Berg
2012-07-09  9:15           ` Arik Nemtsov
2012-07-09  9:23             ` Johannes Berg
2012-07-09  9:39               ` Arik Nemtsov
2012-07-09  9:43                 ` Johannes Berg
2012-07-09  9:53                   ` Arik Nemtsov
2012-07-06 21:05 ` [RFC 2/3] mac80211: track scheduled scan virtual interface Johannes Berg
2012-07-06 21:05 ` [RFC 3/3] mac80211: redesign scan RX Johannes Berg
2012-07-07 22:39   ` Eliad Peller
2012-07-08  9:28     ` Johannes Berg
2012-07-06 21:30 ` [RFC 0/3] mac80211 scanning restructuring Ben Greear
2012-07-06 21:35   ` Johannes Berg
2012-07-06 21:45     ` Ben Greear [this message]

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=4FF75C6C.9030108@candelatech.com \
    --to=greearb@candelatech.com \
    --cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).