Return-path: Received: from he.sipsolutions.net ([78.46.109.217]:36422 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752745Ab2CWJUS (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Mar 2012 05:20:18 -0400 Message-ID: <1332494416.3506.16.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20120323_102021_826095_222475C2) Subject: Re: [RFC 11/12] mac80211: split offchannel functions to per-vif From: Johannes Berg To: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82?= Kazior Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 10:20:16 +0100 In-Reply-To: <4F6C3F32.7040700@tieto.com> References: (sfid-20120320_154026_591857_E0DB8EEA) <1332492804.3506.7.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> <4F6C3F32.7040700@tieto.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 10:15 +0100, Michał Kazior wrote: > Johannes Berg wrote: > > This seems very odd. Why would one vif be off-channel, and the other be > > on-channel? That makes no sense, off-channel is a global state. > > Should mac80211 care if the device does channel-hopping? What if it's > possible for off-channel to be done simultaneously because the device > has two radios? What do you mean by channel hopping? IBSS-like behaviour? The two radios case is interesting, but is it really relevant right now? I suspect the first case of it we'll see will be 11ad and then it's two different bands. > Maybe off-channel should also be reworked more to support multiple > scenarios? What scenarios do you have in mind? > > My thinking here right now is that mac80211-based off-channel and > > scanning will only be supported for devices that don't implement > > multi-channel, since all others really need to do the channel scheduling > > themselves. > > Software off-channel isn't used only for scanning, or is it? It's only used for scanning & P2P-device activities right now, I could see it being used for FT-OTA (with resource reservation) too in the future, if needed, but that's about it. johannes