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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23D77C282C0 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 12:46:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F34B6217D7 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 12:46:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726252AbfAYMqF (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jan 2019 07:46:05 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35018 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725909AbfAYMqF (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jan 2019 07:46:05 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1B9DA12F8; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 12:46:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.43.2.219]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 377E9604A4; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 12:46:02 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2019 13:41:49 +0100 From: Stanislaw Gruszka To: Lorenzo Bianconi Cc: Felix Fietkau , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] mt76x02: use mask for vifs Message-ID: <20190125124148.GB4079@redhat.com> References: <1548344649-10404-1-git-send-email-sgruszka@redhat.com> <1548344649-10404-2-git-send-email-sgruszka@redhat.com> <20190124161235.GA10806@localhost.localdomain> <20190124162040.GA5136@redhat.com> <20190124163541.GB10806@localhost.localdomain> <20190124222040.GA2873@localhost.localdomain> <20190125082556.GA2180@redhat.com> <20190125090236.GA2761@p1372.fit.wifi.vutbr.cz> <20190125094757.GA11700@redhat.com> <20190125102545.GA27731@p1372.fit.wifi.vutbr.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190125102545.GA27731@p1372.fit.wifi.vutbr.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.28]); Fri, 25 Jan 2019 12:46:04 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 11:25:46AM +0100, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 10:02:38AM +0100, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 11:20:42PM +0100, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess this does not work if you add 2 vifs and then you remove the first one > > > > > > > > (you will end up with a wrong configuration in MT_MAC_ADDR_DW{0,1}). I guess > > > > > > > > the hw will not work well if MT_MAC_ADDR_DW{0,1} is not properly configured > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe I am missing something, but let's assume you add the interface vif0 with address > > > > > > 00:11:22:33:44:55 (MT_MAC_ADDR_DW{0,1} will be set to 00:11:22:33:44:55) and > > > > > > then you add vif1 with address 00:aa:bb:cc:dd:ee. If at some point you remove > > > > > > vif0 MT_MAC_ADDR_DW{0,1} will not be properly reconfigured. The problem will > > > > > > be more complex if you have more interfaces > > > > > > > > Ok, so in remove_interface extra code can be added to implement that. > > > > Something like this should address the issue you raised: > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt76x02_util.c b/drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt76x02_util.c > > index 3880caa0c64a..44b4af928a4e 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt76x02_util.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt76x02_util.c > > @@ -320,6 +320,15 @@ void mt76x02_sta_remove(struct mt76_dev *mdev, struct ieee80211_vif *vif, > > } > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mt76x02_add_interface); > > > > +static void mt76x02_setaddr_iterator(void *data, u8 *mac, > > + struct ieee80211_vif *vif) > > +{ > > + struct mt76x02_dev *dev = data; > > + > > + if (!ether_addr_equal(dev->mt76.macaddr, vif->addr)) > > + mt76x02_mac_setaddr(dev, vif->addr); > > This will end-up with multiple configurations if we have more than two > interfaces, right? No. It is called only when number of vifs change from 2 to 1 . But there should be additional check 'dev->vif_mask & BIT(mvif->idx)' since we can have removing interface still present in mac80211. > > void mt76x02_remove_interface(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, > > struct ieee80211_vif *vif) > > { > > @@ -328,6 +337,10 @@ void mt76x02_remove_interface(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, > > > > mt76_txq_remove(&dev->mt76, vif->txq); > > dev->vif_mask &= ~BIT(mvif->idx); > > + > > + if (hweight16(dev->vif_mask) == 1) > > + ieee80211_iterate_interfaces(hw, 0, mt76x02_setaddr_iterator, > > + dev); > > I guess we have the same issue if we have more than two interfaces and we > remove the first one that has been configured. We can not configure more than one MAC address without using MT_MAC_ADDR_EXT registers. If there are more than one vif, there is no point to set MT_MAC_ADDR. > Moreover I am a little worried about tpt regressions with this patch. > Are you sure that if you use complete different mac addresses on a multivif scenario > you can get the same tpt on all the interfaces? Could you please provide some > tpt results? How exactly posted patch can cause tpt regression ? Posted patch just add possibility to configure HW MAC address by this: iw dev wlan0 del iw phy phy0 interface add wlan0 type managed addr 00:11:22:33:44:55 what is feature of mt76x2u. Patch just extend that possibly to other mt76x02 devices and allow to remove custom mt76x2u add_interfacea callback. Thanks Stanislaw