Return-path: Received: from arroyo.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.40]:51926 "EHLO arroyo.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757190Ab3AIIlk (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jan 2013 03:41:40 -0500 Message-ID: <50ED2CC7.5060609@ti.com> (sfid-20130109_094143_864007_6A889C8A) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 10:39:35 +0200 From: Victor Goldenshtein MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Seth Forshee CC: , Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: fix delayed ADDBA response References: <1357654597-8493-1-git-send-email-victorg@ti.com> <20130108174111.GB20290@thinkpad-t410> In-Reply-To: <20130108174111.GB20290@thinkpad-t410> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 08/01/13 19:41, Seth Forshee wrote: > On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 04:16:37PM +0200, Victor Goldenshtein wrote: >> Block frame processing during scan might delay the >> ADDBA response, which eventually timeouts and >> significantly reduces the device throughput. >> Remove this constrain as it's not required for the >> HW scan. >> >> Signed-off-by: Victor Goldenshtein >> --- >> net/mac80211/iface.c | 2 +- >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/net/mac80211/iface.c b/net/mac80211/iface.c >> index 06fac29..a26ee36 100644 >> --- a/net/mac80211/iface.c >> +++ b/net/mac80211/iface.c >> @@ -1063,7 +1063,7 @@ static void ieee80211_iface_work(struct work_struct *work) >> if (!ieee80211_sdata_running(sdata)) >> return; >> >> - if (local->scanning) >> + if (local->scanning&& !local->ops->hw_scan) > > Wouldn't checking for SCAN_HW_SCANNING be better? > IMHO it's totally the same, besides that mac80211 use this check in many other places, but lets see what Johannes thinks. -- Thanks, Victor.