Re: [PATCH 2/7] ath6kl: Add wmi functions to configure wow mode and host sleep mode

[Raja Mani <rmani@qca.qualcomm.com>]

On Friday 28 October 2011 05:49 PM, Kalle Valo wrote:
> On 10/25/2011 01:37 PM, rmani@qca.qualcomm.com wrote:
>> From: Raja Mani<rmani@qca.qualcomm.com>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Raja Mani<rmani@qca.qualcomm.com>
>
> Empty commit log.

I'll add commit log here..

>
>> +static void ath6kl_wmi_relinquish_implicit_pstream_credits(struct wmi *wmi)
>> +{
>> +	u16 active_tsids;
>> +	u8 stream_exist;
>> +	int i;
>> +
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Relinquish credits from all implicitly created pstreams
>> +	 * since when we go to sleep. If user created explicit
>> +	 * thinstreams exists with in a fatpipe leave them intact
>> +	 * for the user to delete.
>> +	 */
>> +	spin_lock_bh(&wmi->lock);
>> +	stream_exist = wmi->fat_pipe_exist;
>> +	spin_unlock_bh(&wmi->lock);
>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; i<  WMM_NUM_AC; i++) {
>> +		if (stream_exist&  (1<<  i)) {
>> +
>> +			spin_lock_bh(&wmi->lock);
>> +			active_tsids = wmi->stream_exist_for_ac[i];
>> +			spin_unlock_bh(&wmi->lock);
>> +
>> +			/*
>> +			 * If there are no user created thin streams
>> +			 * delete the fatpipe
>> +			 */
>> +			if (!active_tsids) {
>> +				stream_exist&= ~(1<<  i);
>> +				/*
>> +				 * Indicate inactivity to driver layer for
>> +				 * this fatpipe (pstream)
>> +				 */
>> +				ath6kl_indicate_tx_activity(wmi->parent_dev,
>> +							    i, false);
>> +			}
>> +		}
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	spin_lock_bh(&wmi->lock);
>> +	wmi->fat_pipe_exist = stream_exist;
>> +	spin_unlock_bh(&wmi->lock);
>
> The locking here doesn't really make sense. For example, any changes to
> wmi->fat_pipe_exist during the for loop will be overwritten. Also lock
> handling with wmi->stream_exist_for_ac[i] looks fishy.

Is it fine just removal of both locking (For "active_tsids = 
wmi->stream_exist_for_ac[i]" and "wmi->fat_pipe_exist = stream_exist") ?

I am sure about the impact..Could you please give some point how above 
locking can be improved ?

>
>> +int ath6kl_wmi_set_host_sleep_mode_cmd(struct wmi *wmi,
>> +				  struct wmi_set_host_sleep_mode_cmd *host_mode)
>
> Don't use the struct as a parameter, you could instead provide an enum
> like this:
>
> enum ath6kl_host_mode {
> 	ATH6KL_HOST_MODE_AWAKE,
> 	ATH6KL_HOST_MODE_ASLEEP,
> };
>

Okay.

>> +{
>> +	struct sk_buff *skb;
>> +	struct wmi_set_host_sleep_mode_cmd *cmd;
>> +	int ret;
>> +
>> +	if (host_mode->awake == host_mode->asleep)
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>
> ...and then you can remove this test.

Fine.

>
>> +int ath6kl_wmi_set_wow_mode_cmd(struct wmi *wmi,
>> +				struct wmi_set_wow_mode_cmd *wow_mode)
>
> I'm sure you can guess what I'm about to say here ;)

:) Got it..

>
> Kalle