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 v2 2/2] wifi: ath12k: Introduce the container for mac80211 hw
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:08:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bk9m7f5g.fsf@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240112024214.3481840-3-quic_periyasa@quicinc.com> (Karthikeyan Periyasamy's message of "Fri, 12 Jan 2024 08:12:14 +0530")
Karthikeyan Periyasamy <quic_periyasa@quicinc.com> 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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-15 16:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-12 2:42 [PATCH v2 0/2] wifi: ath12k: Introduce hw abstraction Karthikeyan Periyasamy
2024-01-12 2:42 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] wifi: ath12k: Refactor the mac80211 hw access from link/radio Karthikeyan Periyasamy
2024-01-12 16:38 ` Jeff Johnson
2024-01-12 2:42 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] wifi: ath12k: Introduce the container for mac80211 hw Karthikeyan Periyasamy
2024-01-12 16:39 ` Jeff Johnson
2024-01-15 16:08 ` Kalle Valo [this message]
2024-01-16 5:14 ` Karthikeyan Periyasamy
2024-01-16 12:38 ` Kalle Valo
2024-01-15 16:19 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] wifi: ath12k: Introduce hw abstraction Kalle Valo
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=87bk9m7f5g.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