Wen Gong <quic_wgong@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 9/12/2022 6:49 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Wen Gong <quic_wgong@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> Hi Johannes, >>> >>> Currently for MLO test, the others links's rx_nss of struct >>> ieee80211_link_sta is still value 0 in ieee80211_set_associated(), >>> becaue they are not pass into ieee80211_sta_set_rx_nss() in >>> mac80211 except the deflink which means the primary link. >>> This lead driver get nss = 0 for other links. Will you fix it >>> or is it design by default? >>> >>> Only primary link has valid rx_nss value which is not 0 by below call stack. >>> ieee80211_assoc_success()-> >>> rate_control_rate_init(sta); >>> >>> commit:c71420db653aba30a234d1e4cf86dde376e604fa >>> wifi: mac80211: RCU-ify link STA pointers >> Strange format and s-o-b missing. Was this meant as an RFC patch? > > This is not a patch for review, it is to ask some question about the patch > > "wifi: mac80211: RCU-ify link STA pointers" which is already upstream. Then you should not add "[PATCH]" in the subject. The string "[PATCH]" is supposed to inform that the email contains a patch which should be applied. -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
