Search Linux Wireless

Re: [PATCH v10 2/4] mac80211: multiple bssid support in interface handling

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

 



On Mon, 2021-04-26 at 12:05 -0700, Aloka Dixit wrote:
> 
> + * @IEEE80211_HW_SUPPORTS_MBSSID_AP: Hardware supports multiple BSSID
> + *	advertisements in AP mode.
> + * @IEEE80211_HW_SUPPORTS_EMA_AP: Hardware supports enhanced multiple BSSID
> + *	advertisements in AP mode.

Is there a good reason for these - the driver can just set the extended
nl80211 flags instead and we can check, or nl80211 already checked?
> 

> +static int ieee80211_set_mbssid_options(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata,
> +					struct cfg80211_mbssid_config params)
> +{
> +	struct ieee80211_local *local = sdata->local;
> +	struct wiphy *wiphy = local->hw.wiphy;
> +	struct net_device *parent;
> +	struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *psdata;
> +
> +	if (!params.count || sdata->vif.type != NL80211_IFTYPE_AP ||
> +	    !ieee80211_hw_check(&local->hw, SUPPORTS_MBSSID_AP))
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	sdata->vif.mbssid.parent = NULL;
> +	sdata->vif.mbssid.flags = IEEE80211_VIF_MBSSID_TX;
> +	if (params.parent) {
> +		parent = __dev_get_by_index(wiphy_net(wiphy), params.parent);
> +		if (!parent || !parent->ieee80211_ptr)
> +			return -EINVAL;


Hm wait, didn't I see the same code in cfg80211 - maybe cfg80211 should
just pass the pointer?
> 
>  static int ieee80211_del_iface(struct wiphy *wiphy, struct wireless_dev *wdev)
>  {
> +	struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata = IEEE80211_WDEV_TO_SUB_IF(wdev);
> +	struct ieee80211_local *local;
> +	struct ieee80211_vif *vif;
> +
> +	if (!sdata)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	local = sdata->local;
> +	vif = &sdata->vif;
> +	if (vif->type == NL80211_IFTYPE_AP &&
> +	    ieee80211_hw_check(&local->hw, SUPPORTS_MBSSID_AP)) {
> +		if (vif->mbssid.flags & IEEE80211_VIF_MBSSID_TX) {
> +			struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *child, *tmpsdata;
> +
> +			wiphy_unlock(local->hw.wiphy);
> +			mutex_lock(&local->iflist_mtx);

I really don't think you can drop the locking like that in the middle of
something. That's almost always a recipe for disaster.

> @@ -375,6 +375,18 @@ static void ieee80211_do_stop(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata, bool going_do
>  	struct cfg80211_chan_def chandef;
>  	bool cancel_scan;
>  	struct cfg80211_nan_func *func;
> +	struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *parent;
> +
> +	if (sdata->vif.type == NL80211_IFTYPE_AP &&
> +	    ieee80211_hw_check(&local->hw, SUPPORTS_MBSSID_AP) &&
> +	    sdata->vif.mbssid.flags & IEEE80211_VIF_MBSSID_NON_TX) {
> +		parent = vif_to_sdata(sdata->vif.mbssid.parent);
> +		if (parent && ieee80211_sdata_running(parent)) {
> +			wiphy_unlock(local->hw.wiphy);
> +			dev_close(parent->wdev.netdev);
> +			wiphy_lock(local->hw.wiphy);

Same here.

johannes




[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