Return-path: Received: from charlotte.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.58]:47852 "EHLO smtp.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751271AbYKSVbU (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:31:20 -0500 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:18:26 -0500 From: "John W. Linville" To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Cc: Johannes Berg , Rami Rosen , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "kune@deine-taler.de" , Jouni Malinen Subject: Re: [PATCH ] zd1211rw: enable master mode. (wireless-testing) Message-ID: <20081119211826.GJ3485@tuxdriver.com> (sfid-20081119_223124_924576_06639F55) References: <1226943608.3902.36.camel@johannes.berg> <1227106146.26243.43.camel@johannes.berg> <1227107869.26243.52.camel@johannes.berg> <20081119160135.GB3485@tuxdriver.com> <1227126620.26243.71.camel@johannes.berg> <20081119210046.GC5900@tesla> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20081119210046.GC5900@tesla> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 01:00:46PM -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 12:30:19PM -0800, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-11-19 at 11:01 -0500, John W. Linville wrote: > > > > > Is there some way we could take that into account? I'm sure there > > > are users who would prefer to have an AP (i.e. their laptop) that > > > can't support PS clients rather than not having an AP at all. > > > > That's a good question. The distinction here is between empowering users > > to do the wrong thing (AP without proper PS support) and enforcing the > > right thing (with the consequence of complete loss of AP functionality). > > The issue I see here is that users will see "ohh shiny, AP support" > > without knowing that it doesn't actually really support it. Not sure > > which side of the line we want to stand on, I prefer the correctness > > side but I can see arguments for the other side, would just like to have > > users know. Maybe we could have some way to tell hostapd this and then > > have hostapd print a huge warning about it when started up? > > How about making it Kconfigable for broken AP support and add the > warning there? That doesn't really associate the bad behavior with specific drivers. Probably better to send something do dmesg and/or make hostap aware of the issue. Any idea if many STAs are smart enough to stop going to sleep once (or if) they realize they are missing frames? John -- John W. Linville Linux should be at the core linville@tuxdriver.com of your literate lifestyle.