Hello Tamizh,
> Co-Developed-by: Tamizh Chelvam <tamizhr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan <vthiagar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Tamizh chelvam <tamizhr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/net/cfg80211.h | 14 +++++++
> include/uapi/linux/nl80211.h | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> net/wireless/nl80211.c | 86 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> net/wireless/rdev-ops.h | 15 ++++++++
> net/wireless/trace.h | 27 +++++++++++++
> 5 files changed, 211 insertions(+)
...
> diff --git a/include/net/cfg80211.h b/include/net/cfg80211.h
> index 5801d76..dd024da 100644
> --- a/include/net/cfg80211.h
> +++ b/include/net/cfg80211.h
...
> /**
> @@ -4035,6 +4044,9 @@ struct wiphy_iftype_ext_capab {
> * @txq_limit: configuration of internal TX queue frame limit
> * @txq_memory_limit: configuration internal TX queue memory limit
> * @txq_quantum: configuration of internal TX queue scheduler quantum
> + *
> + * @max_data_retry_count: Maximum limit can be configured as retry count
> + * for a TID.
> */
> struct wiphy {
> /* assign these fields before you register the wiphy */
> @@ -4171,6 +4183,8 @@ struct wiphy {
> u32 txq_memory_limit;
> u32 txq_quantum;
>
> + u8 max_data_retry_count;
> +
> char priv[0] __aligned(NETDEV_ALIGN);
> };
Could you please clarify why do you define max_data_retry_count instead of
making use of existing wiphy params: retry_short (dot11ShortRetryLimit)
and retry_long (dot11LongRetryLimit) ?
> diff --git a/net/wireless/nl80211.c b/net/wireless/nl80211.c
> index d744388..d386ad7 100644
> --- a/net/wireless/nl80211.c
> +++ b/net/wireless/nl80211.c
...
> +static int nl80211_set_tid_config(struct sk_buff *skb,
> + struct genl_info *info)
> +{
> + struct cfg80211_registered_device *rdev = info->user_ptr[0];
> + struct nlattr *attrs[NL80211_ATTR_TID_MAX + 1];
> + struct nlattr *tid;
> + struct net_device *dev = info->user_ptr[1];
> + const char *peer = NULL;
> + u8 tid_no;
> + int ret = -EINVAL, retry_short = -1, retry_long = -1;
> +
> + tid = info->attrs[NL80211_ATTR_TID_CONFIG];
> + if (!tid)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + ret = nla_parse_nested(attrs, NL80211_ATTR_TID_MAX, tid,
> + nl80211_attr_tid_policy, info->extack);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + if (!attrs[NL80211_ATTR_TID])
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (attrs[NL80211_ATTR_TID_RETRY_SHORT]) {
> + retry_short = nla_get_u8(attrs[NL80211_ATTR_TID_RETRY_SHORT]);
> + if (!retry_short ||
> + retry_short > rdev->wiphy.max_data_retry_count)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + if (attrs[NL80211_ATTR_TID_RETRY_LONG]) {
> + retry_long = nla_get_u8(attrs[NL80211_ATTR_TID_RETRY_LONG]);
> + if (!retry_long ||
> + retry_long > rdev->wiphy.max_data_retry_count)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + tid_no = nla_get_u8(attrs[NL80211_ATTR_TID]);
> + if (tid_no >= IEEE80211_FIRST_TSPEC_TSID)
> + return -EINVAL;
Not that important, but this tid_no check can be placed after
attrs[NL80211_ATTR_TID].
BTW, some special tid_no value (e.g. (u8)-1) could be used to notify driver
that retry settings should be applied for all the TIDs. IIUC the only
required change would be to modify this tid_no sanity check.
Regards,
Sergey
