From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from he.sipsolutions.net ([78.46.109.217]:43181 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752153Ab0DVIqR (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Apr 2010 04:46:17 -0400 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCHv3 2/2] cfg80211: Remove default dynamic PS timeout value From: Johannes Berg To: Juuso Oikarinen Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" In-Reply-To: <1271739508.6205.5712.camel@wimaxnb.nmp.nokia.com> References: <1271409274-17162-1-git-send-email-juuso.oikarinen@nokia.com> <1271409274-17162-3-git-send-email-juuso.oikarinen@nokia.com> <1271688229.23671.2.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> <1271739508.6205.5712.camel@wimaxnb.nmp.nokia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 10:46:14 +0200 Message-ID: <1271925974.3605.8.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 07:58 +0300, Juuso Oikarinen wrote: > > Or actually, wouldn't it make sense to move the pm_qos logic here (into > > cfg80211)? > > I thought about that but then I realised that would contradict with one > of the arguments presented against the dynamic ps API I proposed > earlier. The argument specifically stated we don't want the API as in > the future there will be some uber-cool psm implementations in some > (full-mac?) chipsets that don't even use a value like this. > > Therefore I opted to leave the implementation in mac80211, thinking that > the entire configuration option will be removed from the cfg80211 once > the wext is gone. Fair enough. I just thought that IFF the device wants to use a similar algorithm, it should use the exact same one. But we can cross that bridge when we have a device. johannes