On 1/19/2023 9:52 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Wed, 2022-12-14 at 04:39 -0500, Wen Gong wrote:
Currently the regulatory driver does not call the regulatory callback
reg_notifier for self managed wiphys. Sometimes driver needs cfg80211
to calculate the info of ieee80211_channel such as flags and power,
and driver needs to get the info of ieee80211_channel after hint of
driver, but driver does not know when calculation of the info of
ieee80211_channel become finished, so add notify to driver after
reg_process_self_managed_hint() from cfg80211 is a good way, then
driver could get the correct info in callback of reg_notifier.
Seems reasonable - but maybe unexpected to some drivers, perhaps it
should be opt-in?
Though I guess not many drivers actually use this infrastructure in the
first place?
Yes, I will add a new flag such as WIPHY_FLAG_NOTIFY_REGDOM_BY_DRIVER
for this driver.
is it ok?
@@ -3095,6 +3107,13 @@ static void notify_self_managed_wiphys(struct regulatory_request *request)
if (wiphy->regulatory_flags & REGULATORY_WIPHY_SELF_MANAGED &&
request->initiator == NL80211_REGDOM_SET_BY_USER)
reg_call_notifier(wiphy, request);
+
+ if (wiphy->regulatory_flags & REGULATORY_WIPHY_SELF_MANAGED &&
+ request->initiator == NL80211_REGDOM_SET_BY_DRIVER &&
+ request->wiphy_idx == get_wiphy_idx(wiphy)) {
+ reg_call_notifier(wiphy, request);
+ request->wiphy_idx = WIPHY_IDX_INVALID;
+ }
Why set the request->wiphy_idx here? Should this even go through
reg_process_pending_hints() at all?
it is to skip handle for NL80211_REGDOM_SET_BY_DRIVER in
reg_process_pending_hints()/reg_process_hint().
After change to use reg_call_notifier(), then it is not need again.
+ driver_request = kzalloc(sizeof(struct regulatory_request), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!driver_request)
+ return;
+
+ memcpy(driver_request, &request, sizeof(*driver_request));
kmemdup()?
yes.
After change to use reg_call_notifier(), then it is not need again.
+ queue_regulatory_request(driver_request);
But again not sure you should do this, rather than calling the notifier
directly?
I mean, you could just do reg_call_notifier() here, it's already async?
Yes, I will change to use reg_call_notifier() here, then it will be simple.
johannes
