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 B9EBCC54E58 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 18:49:46 +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=ea0x6rhWSAj0eEZO04PUVPCBhh40SoP3teizHo7H3Ck=; b=m8yxM33YtiKR48MUwSIsdPTc5B cNHZFA5L3X1O3hSY6pjVgw00NpzowYRYF+3XE+ao3bmjfrsiB83a75ZRv+Q5Bbz9UNw5SkQA+O2HW WQSzsIBnbubAs2v1xg1v73BVGJAkT+zc96v0pT11l7CYxy5QCEtDbRo2LsRoNd64PErJDq91unOFY qD0CKay8iB7xCXfrnUYj9uQ7EiSsQrMVq54AsabUxPjNR3pYYUoIoEzmTiwMc3sKCptrTnpzU7MUs zqQBJkXC4DnH+mEEYXN9G6UgPd2OlzNypKcDSzDA7WYPW81uXZpz0MKn8MiMz+XIGJaLmcYYmMN1d UX4/jEKA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rmI3O-00000009jlR-027b for ath12k@archiver.kernel.org; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 18:49:46 +0000 Received: from sin.source.kernel.org ([2604:1380:40e1:4800::1]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rmI3K-00000009jkQ-1kh9 for ath12k@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 18:49:44 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by sin.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CE4DCE0B2A; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 18:49:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1ED36C433F1; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 18:49:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1710787779; bh=EeqLoy972CXIctyyYCv4fLVanv++DUBIP/KXK2igIPY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=qgLLG59XHcwBB0Ehrd7jAyICGaVuQI/sbLd1nWOw+T4Z+7QkrNTi2DfIaCAGHeqAX 8QxZIHMylviaIIIx+YnAHej6/iKSdjPXFwUgpAmxXZjzWxpJvDctsVTELtQaKjpR32 553kXW77/uUf8JociB7e1Y6g5yqaPQkHBeUThplkAUSwzoakEpQyr/xsHkc4wUp5Hh 7h1h1obyB+ixb6j8/10/EAM6N3hv6ZuV0xCwOfbVJ+/dgmStmvz1vYcUrNeyYMsz7i FjxvoOKdt2d/L5iJcGmRZNoUN3Tr40Rvat3Q9/YN66epG5WGDUUlONXjDL+DFQugV0 BG/SGnwXMjHxg== From: Kalle Valo To: Aloka Dixit Cc: , Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: ath12k: use correct flag field for 320 MHz References: <20240314204651.11075-1-quic_alokad@quicinc.com> <87sf0nczca.fsf@kernel.org> <878r2fctng.fsf@kernel.org> <4940b6cf-a68d-4799-ccf3-f90dcc105e3e@quicinc.com> Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 20:49:37 +0200 In-Reply-To: <4940b6cf-a68d-4799-ccf3-f90dcc105e3e@quicinc.com> (Aloka Dixit's message of "Mon, 18 Mar 2024 11:40:02 -0700") Message-ID: <87v85jbcji.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-20240318_114942_671025_924EB009 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 10.98 ) 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 Aloka Dixit writes: > On 3/18/2024 10:54 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Kalle Valo writes: >> >>> Aloka Dixit writes: >>> >>>> WMI_PEER_EXT_320MHZ (0x2) is defined as an extended flag, replace >>>> peer_flags by peer_flags_ext while sending peer data. >>>> >>>> Tested-on: QCN9274 hw2.0 PCI WLAN.WBE.1.0.1-00029-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1 >>>> >>>> Fixes: 6734cf9b4cc7 ("wifi: ath12k: peer assoc for 320 MHz") >>>> Signed-off-by: Aloka Dixit >>> >>> What does this fix from user's point of view? Does it mean that 320 MHz >>> chanels were broken before and this commit fixes that? I can ammend the >>> commit message. >> And what about WCN7850? Does it work the same? > > 320 MHz association was broken. It was a re-basing error while sending > the original patch because the correct field was added during testing, > still used that way internally too. I have not tested WCN7850 on this > patch but yes will require the same field. Current code was setting > QOS bit instead of 320MHz. Thanks, does this look ok: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/ath.git/commit/?h=pending&id=c4ade6bdf3d1a2d9d05606a85431f154559d5a80 -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches