From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>
To: Karthikeyan Periyasamy <quic_periyasa@quicinc.com>
Cc: <ath12k@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] wifi: ath12k: Refactor hardware recovery synchronous
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2024 12:12:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87sf22osis.fsf@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240130060838.3895599-3-quic_periyasa@quicinc.com> (Karthikeyan Periyasamy's message of "Tue, 30 Jan 2024 11:38:37 +0530")
Karthikeyan Periyasamy <quic_periyasa@quicinc.com> writes:
> Currently, in multi wiphy models, radio/link level synchronization is
> sufficient for MAC hardware (ieee80211_hw) reconfigure/recovery procedures
> since each radio/link is exposed as a MAC hardware (ieee80211_hw). However,
> in single wiphy models, multiple radio/links is exposed as a MAC hardware
> (ieee80211_hw) through the driver hardware abstraction (ath12k_hw) layer.
> In such scenario, we need synchronization between the reconfigure/recovery
> callback operations (i.e., ath12k_core_post_reconfigure_recovery(),
> ieee80211_ops->start(), ieee80211_ops->reconfig_complete(),
> ieee80211_ops->stop()) at the driver hardware abstraction (ath12k_hw) layer
> instead of radio/link (ath12k) layer. Therefore, introduce a new mutex in
> the ath12k_hw layer. This approach ensures compatibility of the hardware
> recovery procedure with both multi wiphy models and future single wiphy
> models.
>
> Tested-on: QCN9274 hw2.0 PCI WLAN.WBE.1.0.1-00029-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1
>
> Signed-off-by: Karthikeyan Periyasamy <quic_periyasa@quicinc.com>
[...]
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath12k/core.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath12k/core.h
> @@ -600,7 +600,12 @@ struct ath12k {
> struct ath12k_hw {
> struct ieee80211_hw *hw;
>
> + /* To synchronize hardware restart operation */
> + struct mutex conf_mutex;
As we discussed already offline, there's a high bar for adding new
mutexes. I would rather remove the existing conf_mutex than add a new
one.
Also having two mutexes named 'conf_mutex' in the same driver is risky,
it would be very easy to confuse the two.
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-09 10:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-30 6:08 [PATCH 0/3] wifi: ath12k: Refactor the hardware recovery procedures Karthikeyan Periyasamy
2024-01-30 6:08 ` [PATCH 1/3] wifi: ath12k: Refactor the hardware recovery procedure Karthikeyan Periyasamy
2024-01-30 19:39 ` Jeff Johnson
2024-01-30 6:08 ` [PATCH 2/3] wifi: ath12k: Refactor hardware recovery synchronous Karthikeyan Periyasamy
2024-01-30 19:39 ` Jeff Johnson
2024-02-09 10:12 ` Kalle Valo [this message]
2024-01-30 6:08 ` [PATCH 3/3] wifi: ath12k: Refactor the hardware state Karthikeyan Periyasamy
2024-01-30 19:39 ` Jeff Johnson
2024-04-23 20:55 ` [PATCH 0/3] wifi: ath12k: Refactor the hardware recovery procedures Jeff Johnson
2024-04-24 2:54 ` Karthikeyan Periyasamy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87sf22osis.fsf@kernel.org \
--to=kvalo@kernel.org \
--cc=ath12k@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quic_periyasa@quicinc.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox