On Wed, 2014-05-07 at 15:20 +0300, Luca Coelho wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-05-07 at 14:13 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-05-07 at 15:08 +0300, Luca Coelho wrote:
> >
> > > I was thinking about the case where you you need to involve 3 contexts.
> > > Let's say you have 2 vifs in the same context and after the switch you
> > > need to split them into 2 new ones (for instance, if there is some
> > > incompatibility in the new chandefs).
> > >
> > > With the generic transactions you could do:
> > > - new chanctx2
> > > - new chanctx3
> > > - switch vif1 chanctx1->chanctx2
> > > - switch vif2 chanctx1->chanctx3
> > > - del chanctx1
> >
> > This isn't an interesting case, because it means you have a spare, so
> > you might as well do
> >
> > new chanctx3
> > switch vif2 chanctx1->chanctx3
> > switch_transaction(chanctx1, chanctx2, vif1)
>
> Couldn't this potentially break the combinations temporarily again?
I don't see why? You had a spare channel context to start with,
otherwise you'd never have accepted this situation. Therefore, you can
use the spare one before actually doing the proposed
switch_vif_chanctx().
Ultimately, what I'm trying to say is that instead of the proposed
switch_vif_chanctx(), we need to have this:
enum ieee80211_chanctx_switch_mode - as before
(*switch_vif_chanctx)(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
struct ieee80211_vif **vifs, int n_vifs,
struct ieee80211_chanctx_conf *old_ctx,
struct ieee80211_chanctx_conf *new_ctx,
enum ieee80211_chanctx_switch_mode mode);
johannes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
