Return-path: Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([192.100.105.134]:38604 "EHLO mgw-mx09.nokia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753900AbYL1NAA (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Dec 2008 08:00:00 -0500 To: "Matthew Garrett" Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] mac80211: implement dynamic power save References: <20081218211532.6842.88104.stgit@tikku> <20081218211712.6842.98402.stgit@tikku> <20081224132432.GA27658@srcf.ucam.org> From: Kalle Valo Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 14:59:35 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20081224132432.GA27658@srcf.ucam.org> (ext Matthew Garrett's message of "Wed\, 24 Dec 2008 13\:24\:32 +0000") Message-ID: <87wsdkmp54.fsf@nokia.com> (sfid-20081228_140003_499416_E1AC46C3) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Matthew Garrett writes: > Are we able to estimate the worst-case latency that will be introduced > by this? If so, it would be helpful to tie it into the pm_qos framework. I'm not familiar with pm_qos framework, unfortunately, but there's some work to do still to get mac80211 client power save implemention into shape and I would like get the basics implemented first. After that is done, we could start looking at the pm_qos framework and see if it makes sense to use it. -- Kalle Valo