Return-path: Received: from mms3.broadcom.com ([216.31.210.19]:4922 "EHLO mms3.broadcom.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751272Ab2JRH0Z (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Oct 2012 03:26:25 -0400 Message-ID: <507FAF19.6030500@broadcom.com> (sfid-20121018_092628_390987_B1CB0910) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 09:26:17 +0200 From: "Arend van Spriel" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Bing Zhao" cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, "Johannes Berg" , "John W. Linville" , "Sam Leffler" , "Amitkumar Karwar" Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/6] cfg80211: add scan flag to indicate its priority References: <1350542071-26498-1-git-send-email-bzhao@marvell.com> <1350542071-26498-4-git-send-email-bzhao@marvell.com> In-Reply-To: <1350542071-26498-4-git-send-email-bzhao@marvell.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 10/18/2012 08:34 AM, Bing Zhao wrote: > From: Sam Leffler > > Add NL80211_SCAN_FLAG_LOW_PRIORITY flag support. It tells drivers > that this is a low priority scan request, so that they can take > necessary action. > Drivers need to advertise low priority scan capability during > registration. I missed the previous versions of this patch series, but what 'necessary action' is needed for a low priority scan request. Patch #6 gives a clue so my assumption is that a low prio scan will be *aborted* when associated and data traffic is available. Is that correct? Could it also *suspend* the low prio scan? Just curious whether there is an explicit behavioral requirement here. I probably should dig in previous versions of this patch series. Too bad the cover letter of this one does not have full change log. Gr. AvS