In D9157#1203017, @lwhsu wrote:

Not sure if this patch is still making sense, but maybe some parts are still worth to be picked up.

yup, and it also makes churning on libpmc development easier (if I ever do that again :-) )

comment fixes

update

In D52299#1194452, @bz wrote:

Based on your description it sounds more like you want to disable PS in net80211 and leave it to iwn?

In D52492#1199444, @bz wrote:

@adrian any concerns? The only concern I have is that with bgscans we might see a log entry every 5(?) minutes?

So, the DSPARAMS one is in ieee80211_parse_beacon(), look for IEEE80211_ELEMID_FHPARAMS and IEEE80211_ELEMID_DSPARAMS .

updates from bz

In D50747#1188607, @bz wrote:

On 2nd though, nothing guards against ieee80211_output_seqno_assign() being called twice. Can we be sure net80211 in no case has a seq# assigned to wh? Or should ieee80211_output_seqno_assign() assert that if tid_arg is -1 that tid from from the frame is 0?

I just leave this comment here; it came to my mind based on the next review; I also think we should carefully define what IEEE80211_FEXT_SEQNO_OFFLOAD means with a comment in net80211 as it does not necessarily mean hardware offload like others but could also mean driver offload?

ok, reduced to one line diff, please re-review! thanks!

comment from bz

Abandoning, but it landed!

landed in rGdff11c4f8007

update

Yeah I was /just/ thinking about squishing them together into one commit.

I've tested these with the suggested changes / questions and it works fine, so I'll clean up the diffs tonight and land em. Thanks bz!

remove the % operator in the driver now that the net80211 macros do it for us

In D52300#1194454, @bz wrote:

If you say so; wonder what iwx tells firmware about SMPS?

I cleaned up the seqno assignment stuff in D52301 and D52302. In particular after D52302, we can sweep the drivers and remove the "% IEEE80211_SEQ_RANGE" because, well, it's now done in the macro.

request from bz

oops, forgot to add iwn(4)