On Sun, 2006-11-26 at 11:37 -0500, Daniel Drake wrote: > However the other reason for the patch (transmit > queue needed for active scanning) is bogus,
I think that was just a misunderstanding. > and the patch introduces a > problem where session frames may be transmitted during scanning (using > TX queue control avoids that problem). Which is really the reason why we put that there in the first place :) > Stack-level refcounted TX control like this would also be beneficial for > zd1211rw, currently we have a semi-ugly implementation inside the driver. > I agree with the objectives of this patch but the way I see it is that > it trades one bug for another. A proper solution, as suggested by > Johannes (refcounted stack-level TX control) would not be hard to > implement and would solve the bug without introducing another. Would you actually need a fully refcounted enable/disable? Because for the stack it wouldn't be required if it'd simply not start scanning when queue is disabled and stop scanning immediately when queue stop is requested. johannes
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
