MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1462305820.10444.14.camel@sipsolutions.net>
References: <CABPxzYLtu53V79O--eDJEdRfn-zw3Wq9Po04F=uFp_FrfJjuiA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1462281243.2251.2.camel@sipsolutions.net> <CABPxzYJjRMMaUn+zzpzm8Zv8XAn8nfA8FgMTr7bkZve3XWs8ow@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABPxzYKj-0kaBP6BYQvcTYZtaTTbtc0nR-=69qC9eCDDJoXxaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1462291262.2251.4.camel@sipsolutions.net> <CABPxzY+JXre1SzGyqmwYhTw9BB_-PfR02basW0WS34wZKpxK7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALhHN=pxE2+dHxKLvsdWDt7fZ-FwYSUzps6hWB9m7dmZbFytgg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1462304144.10444.13.camel@sipsolutions.net> <CABPxzYL9ezhovark83mnSVkh7H3XQJjNU+XjvEHdMses6N3FBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1462305820.10444.14.camel@sipsolutions.net>
From: Krishna Chaitanya <chaitanya.mgit@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 12:08:16 +0530
Message-ID: <CABPxzYJ5DN7EH6u=ZikECr69vDo23Su0D5C56BcFExSOvgkB_w@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20160504_083840_225775_B0860FA1)
Subject: Re: dynamic ps + offchannel mgmt_tx + HW RoC
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: Janusz Dziedzic <janusz.dziedzic@tieto.com>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 1:33 AM, Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 01:20 +0530, Krishna Chaitanya wrote:
>> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 1:05 AM, Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.
>> net> wrote:
>> >
>> > There is, btw, perhaps a different way - just fix the damn stuff.
>> >
>> > Requires moving everything into ifmgd rather than local, and then
>> > perhaps if only a single managed interface exists mirroring its
>> > state
>> > into the existing driver calls etc.
>> >
>> > It'd still be a big task, and I don't see much advantage over just
>> > reimplementing it.
>> Yes, requires quite an effort and also need to handle lot of cases.
>> Instead, why don't we make the default as complete PS offload
>> and force the drivers who need to use mac80211 PS negate these
>> in the register_hw? That way we are clear about the intentions.
>
> I don't really see a big advantage, and it'd create churn in a lot of
> drivers. Maybe documenting it with the flags that we really think you
> should set them or something, or making the powersave DOC section
> mention this would be good, but beyond that I don't think it'd be a
> good idea.
that's fine with me.