Search Linux Wireless

Re: [PATCHv6 2/9] nl80211: Add new netlink attribute for TID speicific retry count

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2019-07-31 14:54, Johannes Berg wrote:
^^ there's a typo in the subject

I will fix it in next version.
@@ -3951,6 +3957,7 @@ enum wiphy_flags {
 	WIPHY_FLAG_SUPPORTS_5_10_MHZ		= BIT(22),
 	WIPHY_FLAG_HAS_CHANNEL_SWITCH		= BIT(23),
 	WIPHY_FLAG_HAS_STATIC_WEP		= BIT(24),
+	WIPHY_FLAG_HAS_MAX_DATA_RETRY_COUNT	= BIT(25),

This is never used, so that doesn't make sense? You probably want to
advertise the max_data_retry_count value contingent on this flag (*) in
some attribute, so that userspace can also detect the presence/absence
of the flag for the feature?

(*) doesn't really need to be contingent on the flag - could just be
contingent on max_data_retry_count being non-zero and then you don't
need the flag.

Sure, I will remove this flag.

+ * @NL80211_ATTR_MAX_RETRY_COUNT: The upper limit for the retry count
+ *	configuration that the driver can accept.
  *
  * @NUM_NL80211_ATTR: total number of nl80211_attrs available
  * @NL80211_ATTR_MAX: highest attribute number currently defined
@@ -2823,6 +2825,7 @@ enum nl80211_attrs {
 	NL80211_ATTR_TWT_RESPONDER,

 	NL80211_ATTR_TID_CONFIG,
+	NL80211_ATTR_MAX_RETRY_COUNT,

You already have the attribute, but again, aren't using it.

I will use this in nl80211_get_wiphy to notify userspace.

+ * @NL80211_EXT_FEATURE_PER_TID_RETRY_CONFIG: Driver supports per TID data retry
+ *	count functionality.
+ * @NL80211_EXT_FEATURE_PER_STA_RETRY_CONFIG: Driver supports STA specific
+ *	data retry count functionality.

and if you have these you don't need the WIPHY_FLAG anyway?

Sure.
+	[NL80211_TID_ATTR_CONFIG_RETRY] = { .type = NLA_FLAG },
+	[NL80211_TID_ATTR_CONFIG_RETRY_SHORT] = NLA_POLICY_MIN(NLA_U8, 0),
+	[NL80211_TID_ATTR_CONFIG_RETRY_LONG] = NLA_POLICY_MIN(NLA_U8, 0),

min of 0 doesn't make sense, maybe you meant 1? otherwise just don't set
anything here.

The min value changed to 0 from 1 as per the previous discussions, since this is a retry count and not a tx count.
Or Shall I remove this min value to avoid the confusion ?

+					    "TID specific configuration not "
+					    "supported");

This applies to all the patches - please don't break strings across
multiple lines, even if they cross 80 columns. Even checkpatch won't
give you any warning on this.

Yeah, sure.
+		tid_conf->tid_conf_mask |= IEEE80211_TID_CONF_RETRY;
+		if (attrs[NL80211_TID_ATTR_CONFIG_RETRY_SHORT]) {
+			tid_conf->retry_short =
+			nla_get_u8(attrs[NL80211_TID_ATTR_CONFIG_RETRY_SHORT]);
+			if (tid_conf->retry_short >
+					rdev->wiphy.max_data_retry_count)
+				return -EINVAL;
+		} else {
+			tid_conf->retry_short = -1;
+

I guess you should document that -1 means no changes? Not sure how the
IEEE80211_TID_CONF_RETRY comes in, you're always setting it, so that's
useless - better remove that and document that -1 means no changes?

The value -1 is to notify the driver to use default value by removing peer specific retry count.

Thanks,
Tamizh.




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Host AP]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Wireless Personal Area Network]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Wireless Regulations]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Kernel]     [IDE]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]

  Powered by Linux