Return-path: Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:38164 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751839AbYDUQEm (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Apr 2008 12:04:42 -0400 Received: from Relay2.suse.de (relay-ext.suse.de [195.135.221.8]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9124940B03 for ; Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:04:41 +0200 (CEST) From: Helmut Schaa To: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Question about IEEE80211_PROBE_DELAY Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:04:37 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: <200804211804.38060.hschaa@suse.de> (sfid-20080421_180539_631084_0CE5109B) Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi, I was just playing around with the mac80211 scan-code and stumbled across IEEE80211_PROBE_DELAY. I'm a bit curious why this delay is needed due to the fact that any driver can set the channel_change_time to any value it needs. Therefore I simply removed the IEEE80211_PROBE_DELAY (see below) and only used the channel_change_time exposed by the driver. I did some tests with the iwl4965 and ath5k (reports AR5213A as chipset) driver and did not notice any regression. Could somebody explain to me if the IEEE80211_PROBE_DELAY is needed anymore and for which particular reason? Thanks, Helmut --- a/net/mac80211/mlme.c +++ b/net/mac80211/mlme.c @@ -3853,8 +3853,7 @@ void ieee80211_sta_scan_work(struct work_struct *work) if (skip) break; - next_delay = IEEE80211_PROBE_DELAY + - usecs_to_jiffies(local->hw.channel_change_time); + next_delay = usecs_to_jiffies(local->hw.channel_change_time); local->scan_state = SCAN_SEND_PROBE; break; case SCAN_SEND_PROBE: