From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-bw0-f169.google.com ([209.85.218.169]:42835 "EHLO mail-bw0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750881AbZDPLLo (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2009 07:11:44 -0400 Received: by bwz17 with SMTP id 17so337341bwz.37 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 04:11:42 -0700 (PDT) To: Johannes Berg Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] mac80211 powersave improvements References: <20090415171046.336006351@sipsolutions.net> <87iql4981b.fsf@litku.valot.fi> <1239880000.9737.20.camel@johannes.local> From: Kalle Valo Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 14:11:40 +0300 In-Reply-To: <1239880000.9737.20.camel@johannes.local> (Johannes Berg's message of "Thu\, 16 Apr 2009 13\:06\:40 +0200") Message-ID: <87eivs97kj.fsf@litku.valot.fi> (sfid-20090416_131148_927766_A2832086) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Johannes Berg writes: > On Thu, 2009-04-16 at 14:01 +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: > >> I think this a bad idea. For normal users we should not enable powersave >> by default, at least not yet. I believe that there would be so much >> problems that we would have to revert the change eventually. > > We can go with the configurable one -- and default y in wireless-testing > but default n in mainline for a while. Get press coverage etc. and at > some point flip the switch. That's a lot better. Gradually expanding the amount of users makes it easier. Big bang is always difficult and usually doomed to a failure :) >> > Should we have a default setting for the dynamic PS >> > timeout? >> >> Yes. Having timeout zero makes no sense in normal laptop use. > > So, what's a good default? Fairly long I'd say, maybe 500ms? Yes, at least. Maybe even 1s? We can gradually start lowering it. -- Kalle Valo