Re: [PATCH 01/55] staging: wfx: fix the cache of rate policies on interface reset

Jérôme Pouiller
2019-12-17T14:35:21Z

On Tuesday 17 December 2019 12:52:11 CET Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 05:03:33PM +0000, Jérôme Pouiller wrote:
> > From: Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@silabs.com>
> >
> > Device and driver maintain a cache of rate policies (aka.
> > tx_retry_policy in hardware API).
> >
> > When hif_reset() is sent to hardware, device resets its cache of rate
> > policies. In order to keep driver in sync, it is necessary to do the
> > same on driver.
> >
> > Note, when driver tries to use a rate policy that has not been defined
> > on device, data is sent at 1Mbps. So, this patch should fix abnormal
> > throughput observed sometime after a reset of the interface.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@silabs.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/wfx/data_tx.c | 3 +--
> > drivers/staging/wfx/data_tx.h | 1 +
> > drivers/staging/wfx/sta.c | 6 +++++-
> > 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/wfx/data_tx.c b/drivers/staging/wfx/data_tx.c
> > index b722e9773232..02f001dab62b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/wfx/data_tx.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/wfx/data_tx.c
> > @@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ static int wfx_tx_policy_upload(struct wfx_vif *wvif)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > -static void wfx_tx_policy_upload_work(struct work_struct *work)
> > +void wfx_tx_policy_upload_work(struct work_struct *work)
> > {
> > struct wfx_vif *wvif =
> > container_of(work, struct wfx_vif, tx_policy_upload_work);
> > @@ -270,7 +270,6 @@ void wfx_tx_policy_init(struct wfx_vif *wvif)
> > spin_lock_init(&cache->lock);
> > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cache->used);
> > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cache->free);
> > - INIT_WORK(&wvif->tx_policy_upload_work, wfx_tx_policy_upload_work);
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < HIF_MIB_NUM_TX_RATE_RETRY_POLICIES; ++i)
> > list_add(&cache->cache[i].link, &cache->free);
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/wfx/data_tx.h b/drivers/staging/wfx/data_tx.h
> > index 29faa5640516..a0f9ae69baf5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/wfx/data_tx.h
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/wfx/data_tx.h
> > @@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ struct wfx_tx_priv {
> > } __packed;
> >
> > void wfx_tx_policy_init(struct wfx_vif *wvif);
> > +void wfx_tx_policy_upload_work(struct work_struct *work);
> >
> > void wfx_tx(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct ieee80211_tx_control *control,
> > struct sk_buff *skb);
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/wfx/sta.c b/drivers/staging/wfx/sta.c
> > index 29848a202ab4..471dd15b227f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/wfx/sta.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/wfx/sta.c
> > @@ -592,6 +592,7 @@ static void wfx_do_unjoin(struct wfx_vif *wvif)
> > wfx_tx_flush(wvif->wdev);
> > hif_keep_alive_period(wvif, 0);
> > hif_reset(wvif, false);
> > + wfx_tx_policy_init(wvif);
> > hif_set_output_power(wvif, wvif->wdev->output_power * 10);
> > wvif->dtim_period = 0;
> > hif_set_macaddr(wvif, wvif->vif->addr);
> > @@ -880,8 +881,10 @@ static int wfx_update_beaconing(struct wfx_vif *wvif)
> > if (wvif->state != WFX_STATE_AP ||
> > wvif->beacon_int != conf->beacon_int) {
> > wfx_tx_lock_flush(wvif->wdev);
> > - if (wvif->state != WFX_STATE_PASSIVE)
> > + if (wvif->state != WFX_STATE_PASSIVE) {
> > hif_reset(wvif, false);
> > + wfx_tx_policy_init(wvif);
> > + }
> > wvif->state = WFX_STATE_PASSIVE;
> > wfx_start_ap(wvif);
> > wfx_tx_unlock(wvif->wdev);
> > @@ -1567,6 +1570,7 @@ int wfx_add_interface(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct ieee80211_vif *vif)
> > INIT_WORK(&wvif->set_cts_work, wfx_set_cts_work);
> > INIT_WORK(&wvif->unjoin_work, wfx_unjoin_work);
> >
> > + INIT_WORK(&wvif->tx_policy_upload_work, wfx_tx_policy_upload_work);
> > mutex_unlock(&wdev->conf_mutex);
> >
> > hif_set_macaddr(wvif, vif->addr);
>
> Meta-comment here.
>
> I've been having to hand-edit your patches to get them to be able to
> apply so far, which is fine for 1-10 patches at a time, but when staring
> down a 55-patch series, that's not ok for my end.
>
> The problem is that your email client is turning everything into base64
> text. On it's own, that's fine, but when doing so it turns the
> line-ends from unix ones, into dos line-ends. So, when git decodes the
> base64 text into "plain text" the patch obviously does not apply due to
> the line-ends not matching up.
>
> Any chance you can fix your email client to not convert the line-ends?

Arg... I apologize for that. Yes, I will fix it and re-send the
pull-request.

For the record:

In fact, the conversions to CR-LF and to base64 is done by the SMTP
server that I use (Microsoft Exchange... useless to say that I do not
administrate this server).

I have already noticed that my SMTP server did weird things. So, I
configured git to encode in base64 itself.
However, the configuration line "sendemail.transferEncoding" is ignored
in my version of git (2.20) (--transfer-encoding=base64 continue to
work). Fortunately, the problem seems fixed with git 2.24.

--
Jérôme Pouiller