From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ivo van Doorn Subject: Re: Dscape ieee80211: enabling/disabling the radio Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 15:55:03 +0200 Message-ID: <200605101555.03963.IvDoorn@gmail.com> References: <200605061401.01795.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <200605100001.20180.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <20060510125241.0bb0978b@griffin.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart5859283.XrXNucckAT"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Olivier Return-path: Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.184]:9837 "EHLO nf-out-0910.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751191AbWEJOAU (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 May 2006 10:00:20 -0400 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id k26so378956nfc for ; Wed, 10 May 2006 07:00:19 -0700 (PDT) To: Jiri Benc In-Reply-To: <20060510125241.0bb0978b@griffin.suse.cz> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org --nextPart5859283.XrXNucckAT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Wednesday 10 May 2006 12:52, Jiri Benc wrote: > On Wed, 10 May 2006 00:01:16 +0200, Ivo van Doorn wrote: > > Basicly the dscape stack is performing active scanning while the device= is down, > > but during the active scan it is sending packets out, or at least attem= pting to do so. > > Besides the question if active scanning is preferred over passive scann= ing while interface is down, > > active scanning fails because the packets that should be send are being= send through the regular > > xmit routines of the interface. (IFF_UP is not set for the interface) >=20 > When all interfaces are down, the card must be completely disabled. No > transmitting, no receiving. Currently, there is a (minor) bug in IBSS > code in d80211 stack which tries to perform scanning even when the > interface is down. It's not so important because generated probe > requests are never delivered to the driver if the card is disabled (i.e. > no interfaces are up). >=20 > > This means that besides enabling the radio which should be done in the = driver, the stack should either bring > > up the interface when doing an active scan, or resort to passive scanni= ng while interface is down. >=20 > The stack should not perform any scanning when the interface is not up. Ok thanks. Along with the previous mail about the add_interface and remove_= interface this clears up some misunderstanding about the scanning behaviour. ;) Ivo --nextPart5859283.XrXNucckAT Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBEYfC3aqndE37Em0gRAp7EAJ0d9q9C+Ab62Vr9CK0+ikoBBkoCAgCg1jEA kmr5YnsX+5FKa3UK/OCQ6l0= =u7Km -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart5859283.XrXNucckAT--