Re: pull-request: wireless-drivers-next 2015-05-21
David Miller writes: > From: Kalle Valo > Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 16:39:04 +0300 > >> here's a wireless-drivers pull request for 4.2. This time please pay >> extra attention to this pull as there are two problems: >> >> First of all as you can see the diffstat from git-pull-request in the >> end is just weird. I was long and hard trying to check everything and to >> my understanding all the merges look ok and I cannot explain the reason >> for the diffstat, but of course I might be missing something. Maybe >> git-request-pull is just buggy? At least with gitk everything looks to >> be ok and the patch list below also looks valid. > > The diffstat doesn't look anything like that for me. It contained only > your wireless changes. > > It may have helped that I merged 'net' into 'net-next' right before I > pulled this. Good to hear. >> Secondly there's a non-trivial conflict in >> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c which is due to removal of >> FIF_PROMISC_IN_BSS in commit df1404650c. You need to remove more code >> than just the obvious conflicts shown by git. In the end of this mail I >> added a git diff output after I fixed the conflict, hopefully that helps >> you to fix it. The main points are that you remove >> ath10k_mac_should_disable_promisc() and the last ath10k_monitor_recalc() >> call from ath10k_vdev_start_restart() along with the obvious conflict >> fixes git points out. >> >> There's also a patch from Michal which will also help to fix the >> resolution. Michal, please double check the resolution proposal below so >> that I didn't miss anything. >> >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/6387631/ > > Thanks, I think I got the conflict resolution correct, please have a look. Looks good, thanks for fixing it. -- Kalle Valo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: pull-request: wireless-drivers-next 2015-05-21
From: Kalle Valo Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 16:39:04 +0300 > here's a wireless-drivers pull request for 4.2. This time please pay > extra attention to this pull as there are two problems: > > First of all as you can see the diffstat from git-pull-request in the > end is just weird. I was long and hard trying to check everything and to > my understanding all the merges look ok and I cannot explain the reason > for the diffstat, but of course I might be missing something. Maybe > git-request-pull is just buggy? At least with gitk everything looks to > be ok and the patch list below also looks valid. The diffstat doesn't look anything like that for me. It contained only your wireless changes. It may have helped that I merged 'net' into 'net-next' right before I pulled this. > Secondly there's a non-trivial conflict in > drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c which is due to removal of > FIF_PROMISC_IN_BSS in commit df1404650c. You need to remove more code > than just the obvious conflicts shown by git. In the end of this mail I > added a git diff output after I fixed the conflict, hopefully that helps > you to fix it. The main points are that you remove > ath10k_mac_should_disable_promisc() and the last ath10k_monitor_recalc() > call from ath10k_vdev_start_restart() along with the obvious conflict > fixes git points out. > > There's also a patch from Michal which will also help to fix the > resolution. Michal, please double check the resolution proposal below so > that I didn't miss anything. > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/6387631/ Thanks, I think I got the conflict resolution correct, please have a look. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: pull-request: wireless-drivers-next 2015-05-21
On 22 May 2015 at 14:27, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Michal Kazior writes:
>> On 21 May 2015 at 15:39, Kalle Valo wrote:
[...]
>>> + static int ath10k_vdev_start_restart(struct ath10k_vif *arvif,
>>> +const struct cfg80211_chan_def
>>> *chandef,
>>> +bool restart)
>>> {
>>> struct ath10k *ar = arvif->ar;
>>> - struct cfg80211_chan_def *chandef = &ar->chandef;
>>> struct wmi_vdev_start_request_arg arg = {};
>>> - int ret = 0, ret2;
>>> + int ret = 0;
>>>
>>> lockdep_assert_held(&ar->conf_mutex);
>>>
>>
>> Kalle, I'm not seeing this when I merge your pull tag on top of
>> net-next/master. Am I missing something?
>
> You lost me, you are not seeing what?
Your merge resolution diff seems to include stuff regarding
ath10k_vdev_stop(). I didn't see it when I tried the merge and had
only 2 conflicts: the promisc code and at feature flags (XMIT_FAST).
> I think we have a misunderstanding
That's possible.
> here, let me explain how I created that diff:
>
> git clone --reference ~/linux-2.6/
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git
> cd net-next/
> git pull
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/wireless-drivers-next.git
> tags/wireless-drivers-next-for-davem-2015-05-21
> emacs drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
> git diff > resolution.txt
For what it's worth I did:
git checkout net-next/master
git merge wireless-drivers-next-for-davem-2015-05-21
# fix conflicts
git commit -a
git show
Merge should essentially yield the same result as your pull.
Michał
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: pull-request: wireless-drivers-next 2015-05-21
Michal Kazior writes:
> On 21 May 2015 at 15:39, Kalle Valo wrote:
>
>> Secondly there's a non-trivial conflict in
>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c which is due to removal of
>> FIF_PROMISC_IN_BSS in commit df1404650c. You need to remove more code
>> than just the obvious conflicts shown by git. In the end of this mail I
>> added a git diff output after I fixed the conflict, hopefully that helps
>> you to fix it. The main points are that you remove
>> ath10k_mac_should_disable_promisc() and the last ath10k_monitor_recalc()
>> call from ath10k_vdev_start_restart() along with the obvious conflict
>> fixes git points out.
>>
>> There's also a patch from Michal which will also help to fix the
>> resolution. Michal, please double check the resolution proposal below so
>> that I didn't miss anything.
>>
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/6387631/
[...]
> Looks good to me.
Thanks for checking.
> There's still some code left which is unnecessary (see 2 last hunks on
> patchwork) because due to FIF_PROMISC_IN_BSS removal entire commit
> 548462133d98 becomes obsolete. Since these 2 hunk leftovers don't
> break anything functionally I guess this can be cleaned up in a follow
> up patch after the merge. Just my 2cc.
Just to avoid any confusion, these are the hunks you mean (copypaste
from patchwork, whitespace damage likely):
@@ -1267,7 +1250,7 @@ static int ath10k_vdev_start_restart(struct ath10k_vif
*arvif,
{
struct ath10k *ar = arvif->ar;
struct wmi_vdev_start_request_arg arg = {};
- int ret = 0, ret2;
+ int ret = 0;
lockdep_assert_held(&ar->conf_mutex);
@@ -1326,16 +1309,6 @@ static int ath10k_vdev_start_restart(struct ath10k_vif
*arvif,
ar->num_started_vdevs++;
ath10k_recalc_radar_detection(ar);
- ret = ath10k_monitor_recalc(ar);
- if (ret) {
- ath10k_warn(ar, "mac failed to recalc monitor for vdev %i
restart %d: %d\n",
- arg.vdev_id, restart, ret);
- ret2 = ath10k_vdev_stop(arvif);
- if (ret2)
- ath10k_warn(ar, "mac failed to stop vdev %i restart %d:
%d\n",
- arg.vdev_id, restart, ret2);
- }
-
return ret;
}
Yeah, these needs to be removed. For some reason 'git diff' doesn't show
these hunks after the conflicts are fixed.
>> + static int ath10k_vdev_start_restart(struct ath10k_vif *arvif,
>> +const struct cfg80211_chan_def *chandef,
>> +bool restart)
>> {
>> struct ath10k *ar = arvif->ar;
>> - struct cfg80211_chan_def *chandef = &ar->chandef;
>> struct wmi_vdev_start_request_arg arg = {};
>> - int ret = 0, ret2;
>> + int ret = 0;
>>
>> lockdep_assert_held(&ar->conf_mutex);
>>
>
> Kalle, I'm not seeing this when I merge your pull tag on top of
> net-next/master. Am I missing something?
You lost me, you are not seeing what? I think we have a misunderstanding
here, let me explain how I created that diff:
git clone --reference ~/linux-2.6/
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git
cd net-next/
git pull
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/wireless-drivers-next.git
tags/wireless-drivers-next-for-davem-2015-05-21
emacs drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
git diff > resolution.txt
> Anyway FYI ath10k_vdev_stop() was moved up in the code to avoid
> forward declaration in 822b7e0b633b.
Didn't understand this either.
--
Kalle Valo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: pull-request: wireless-drivers-next 2015-05-21
On 21 May 2015 at 15:39, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> here's a wireless-drivers pull request for 4.2. This time please pay
> extra attention to this pull as there are two problems:
>
> First of all as you can see the diffstat from git-pull-request in the
> end is just weird. I was long and hard trying to check everything and to
> my understanding all the merges look ok and I cannot explain the reason
> for the diffstat, but of course I might be missing something. Maybe
> git-request-pull is just buggy? At least with gitk everything looks to
> be ok and the patch list below also looks valid.
>
> Secondly there's a non-trivial conflict in
> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c which is due to removal of
> FIF_PROMISC_IN_BSS in commit df1404650c. You need to remove more code
> than just the obvious conflicts shown by git. In the end of this mail I
> added a git diff output after I fixed the conflict, hopefully that helps
> you to fix it. The main points are that you remove
> ath10k_mac_should_disable_promisc() and the last ath10k_monitor_recalc()
> call from ath10k_vdev_start_restart() along with the obvious conflict
> fixes git points out.
>
> There's also a patch from Michal which will also help to fix the
> resolution. Michal, please double check the resolution proposal below so
> that I didn't miss anything.
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/6387631/
[...]
> diff --cc drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
> index fcd08b2f8d26,eaa0182e001d..
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
> @@@ -766,9 -1031,68 +1031,48 @@@ static int ath10k_monitor_stop(struct a
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static bool ath10k_mac_should_disable_promisc(struct ath10k *ar)
> -{
> - struct ath10k_vif *arvif;
> -
> - if (!(ar->filter_flags & FIF_PROMISC_IN_BSS))
> - return true;
> -
> - if (!ar->num_started_vdevs)
> - return false;
> -
> - list_for_each_entry(arvif, &ar->arvifs, list)
> - if (arvif->vdev_type != WMI_VDEV_TYPE_AP)
> - return false;
> -
> - ath10k_dbg(ar, ATH10K_DBG_MAC,
> - "mac disabling promiscuous mode because vdev is
> started\n");
> - return true;
> -}
> -
> + static bool ath10k_mac_monitor_vdev_is_needed(struct ath10k *ar)
> + {
> + int num_ctx;
> +
> + /* At least one chanctx is required to derive a channel to start
> +* monitor vdev on.
> +*/
> + num_ctx = ath10k_mac_num_chanctxs(ar);
> + if (num_ctx == 0)
> + return false;
> +
> + /* If there's already an existing special monitor interface then don't
> +* bother creating another monitor vdev.
> +*/
> + if (ar->monitor_arvif)
> + return false;
> +
> + return ar->monitor ||
> - !ath10k_mac_should_disable_promisc(ar) ||
> + test_bit(ATH10K_CAC_RUNNING, &ar->dev_flags);
> + }
> +
> + static bool ath10k_mac_monitor_vdev_is_allowed(struct ath10k *ar)
> + {
> + int num_ctx;
> +
> + num_ctx = ath10k_mac_num_chanctxs(ar);
> +
> + /* FIXME: Current interface combinations and cfg80211/mac80211 code
> +* shouldn't allow this but make sure to prevent handling the
> following
> +* case anyway since multi-channel DFS hasn't been tested at all.
> +*/
> + if (test_bit(ATH10K_CAC_RUNNING, &ar->dev_flags) && num_ctx > 1)
> + return false;
> +
> + return true;
> + }
> +
> static int ath10k_monitor_recalc(struct ath10k *ar)
> {
> - bool should_start;
> + bool needed;
> + bool allowed;
> + int ret;
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&ar->conf_mutex);
>
Looks good to me.
There's still some code left which is unnecessary (see 2 last hunks on
patchwork) because due to FIF_PROMISC_IN_BSS removal entire commit
548462133d98 becomes obsolete. Since these 2 hunk leftovers don't
break anything functionally I guess this can be cleaned up in a follow
up patch after the merge. Just my 2cc.
> @@@ -871,12 -1231,46 +1211,46 @@@ static void ath10k_recalc_radar_detecti
> }
> }
>
> - static int ath10k_vdev_start_restart(struct ath10k_vif *arvif, bool restart)
> + static int ath10k_vdev_stop(struct ath10k_vif *arvif)
> + {
> + struct ath10k *ar = arvif->ar;
> + int ret;
> +
> + lockdep_assert_held(&ar->conf_mutex);
> +
> + reinit_completion(&ar->vdev_setup_done);
> +
> + ret = ath10k_wmi_vdev_stop(ar, arvif->vdev_id);
> + if (ret) {
> + ath10k_warn(ar, "failed to stop WMI vdev %i: %d\n",
> + arvif->vdev_id, ret);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + ret = ath10k_vdev_setup_sync(ar);
> + if (ret) {
> + ath10k_warn(ar, "failed to syncronise setup for vdev %i:
> %d\n",
> + arvif->vdev_id, ret);
> + return ret;
> +
