From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DB83C47258 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 16:09:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Type:MIME-Version: Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=f/k9fW24pjv7xkHzPBCsLzrUti5nNbkSUEqW1STpC0Y=; b=L260YCY+wGhBH+LBqtnU1OsrUd MopAJdnuM/yDSsL1PRY2x3TVscis/f/xX8jQ/DVsrwS/rM46yAQbCDXfCxzXXUwrYsopYuOltVmdO QghvubU7uBlr0DVf2jq7DNjdCYwgJY3AkG5z6plP+ynIw3whR4aDGwbj5DE/FI6plJRxbpYg63D5e o90G0pPHuP4u54GWUlLE7MR79aGAe50IjTM0LCBR31Ro+lAYGPnAK5vvq3yxNhd5B8Ehss3cn1MYC n2auvdHvQkJFz0Rd9+OkG3sDkJhwTFOauZn/8xF2YSZf0pdiK3fXXC88+3GLsw37PW/TQNRYMm18X o4S6GPJg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.96 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rPPWI-009Yxt-0q for ath12k@archiver.kernel.org; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 16:09:02 +0000 Received: from sin.source.kernel.org ([2604:1380:40e1:4800::1]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.96 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rPPWE-009YvY-0u for ath12k@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 16:09:00 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by sin.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00AE5CE095B; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 16:08:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0CE97C433F1; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 16:08:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1705334926; bh=7JwWw9vE0E8HLaR/TPGGpX/7XTNaoCGleSmriAkMXs4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=WKWrPwW85JftTLzf4E6iOSz8VdUPsbXPTClItYFAq1JOhvDUgCkLvIYuXBW67f/gD 75KkoSOMGQVKxRAaKwqIuvcqXtoBzKtzUuZaKvH1ChodBj8i91rXZF75CXtvVsi/Ae NM4mf0w2nkmv/F3kAEa4G1dQWPekkDkr1WHo7MyyeOYmGLFYN4a9bzAerYwUoHRRO/ aYS9cvDZ2tPeP2NYL/BT0WkJgQ8w+YLOC0o88N6jCuh1hVJZh8DA7xGusxCm8YYg9E nQEVcJZ/xf1eJvwWfDvMft9mBwylUwHfArbA6WR9okToCB8LPUVUZ9yv8ZnO/172Ve IVjT0fr1zV7/w== From: Kalle Valo To: Karthikeyan Periyasamy Cc: , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] wifi: ath12k: Introduce the container for mac80211 hw References: <20240112024214.3481840-1-quic_periyasa@quicinc.com> <20240112024214.3481840-3-quic_periyasa@quicinc.com> Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:08:43 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20240112024214.3481840-3-quic_periyasa@quicinc.com> (Karthikeyan Periyasamy's message of "Fri, 12 Jan 2024 08:12:14 +0530") Message-ID: <87bk9m7f5g.fsf@kernel.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240115_080858_495986_491FB232 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 13.34 ) X-BeenThere: ath12k@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "ath12k" Errors-To: ath12k-bounces+ath12k=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Karthikeyan Periyasamy writes: > To support multi link operation, we need to combine all the link/pdev > under a single wiphy. This avoids the overhead of synchronization > across multiple hardware instances in both the cfg80211 and mac80211 > layers. Currently, each link/pdev is registered as separate wiphy, > tightly coupled with link/pdev/radio (ar) structure. To enable single > wiphy registration within the chip, we decouple the wiphy data entity from > the link/pdev/radio (ar) structure and move it under the chip (ab) > structure with a new data container (ath12k_hw) structure. This approach > improves scalability for future multi link operation support. What about struct ath12k_pdev? Do we need it still or should it be removed? > static void ath12k_mac_op_cancel_hw_scan(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, > struct ieee80211_vif *vif) > { > - struct ath12k *ar = hw->priv; > + struct ath12k_hw *ah = ath12k_hw_to_ah(hw); > + struct ath12k *ar; > + > + mutex_lock(&ah->conf_mutex); > + > + ar = ath12k_ah_to_ar(ah); > > mutex_lock(&ar->conf_mutex); > ath12k_scan_abort(ar); > mutex_unlock(&ar->conf_mutex); > > + mutex_unlock(&ah->conf_mutex); > + > cancel_delayed_work_sync(&ar->scan.timeout); > } Do we really need two mutexes? I don't see any analysis about that. And even if we do, I feel that it should be added in a separate patch. -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches