From: Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@redhat.com>
To: Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com>
Cc: johannes@sipsolutions.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linville@tuxdriver.com, zaitcev@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] softmac: return -EAGAIN from getscan while scanning
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 15:21:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060413152148.eba6a4de.zaitcev@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1144930375.2372.10.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 08:12:55 -0400, Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com> wrote:
> > This sounds completely wrong. Do you guys remember the Subject: string
> > of this discussion by any chance?
> There are two options for tools: (a) request scan and block on GIWSCAN
> until it doesn't return EAGAIN, or (b) request a scan, enter a loop,
> wait for the GIWSCAN netlink message to come back. The point here is
> that if you have to write a tool with 100 lines of netlink message
> processing code _just_ to get the "scan done!" message, that's a bitch.
> More complicated programs can obviously do this, but simple tools don't
> want or need to.
Do you realize that "block" means "enterering the kernel and calling
schedule()", which is exactly what is NOT happening in the patch?
I would not mind if the tools "blocked in GIWSCAN", only until
it returns success and not EGAIN.
With EAGAIN returned, you have to a) block elsewhere and not in
GIWSCAN (perhaps in sleep(2) or select(2)), or b) not block at all
and loop.
> I believe that the patch for softmac/bcm43xx EAGAIN is correct.
It is correct, no doubt. The discussion is about wether it is
desirable.
-- Pete
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-04-13 22:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20060411085805.949313000@sipsolutions.net>
2006-04-13 0:42 ` [patch 4] softmac: fix event sending Johannes Berg
[not found] ` <20060411085841.252064000@sipsolutions.net>
2006-04-13 9:00 ` [patch 1/3] softmac: return -EAGAIN from getscan while scanning Pete Zaitcev
2006-04-13 9:06 ` Johannes Berg
2006-04-13 9:34 ` Johannes Berg
2006-04-13 12:14 ` Dan Williams
2006-04-13 16:13 ` Jean Tourrilhes
2006-04-15 19:24 ` Johannes Berg
2006-04-15 21:27 ` Dan Williams
2006-04-13 12:12 ` Dan Williams
2006-04-13 12:19 ` Johannes Berg
2006-04-13 16:00 ` Jouni Malinen
2006-04-13 22:28 ` Pete Zaitcev
2006-04-13 22:45 ` Jouni Malinen
2006-04-13 23:03 ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-04-13 23:35 ` Pete Zaitcev
2006-04-13 22:21 ` Pete Zaitcev [this message]
2006-04-13 9:41 ` [patch 5] softmac: report when scanning has finished Johannes Berg
2006-04-13 12:15 ` Dan Williams
2006-04-13 23:58 [patch 1/3] softmac: return -EAGAIN from getscan while scanning Jean Tourrilhes
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-04-14 0:01 Jean Tourrilhes
2006-04-14 15:58 ` Herbert Xu
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=20060413152148.eba6a4de.zaitcev@redhat.com \
--to=zaitcev@redhat.com \
--cc=dcbw@redhat.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=netdev@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).