On Mon, 2023-11-13 at 11:35 +0200, gregory.greenman@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> @@ -9302,6 +9302,17 @@ bool cfg80211_valid_disable_subchannel_bitmap(u16 *bitmap,
> * case disconnect instead.
> * Also note that the wdev mutex must be held.
> */
> +
> void cfg80211_links_removed(struct net_device *dev, u16 link_mask);
What happened there?
> +/**
> + * cfg80211_schedule_channels_check - schedule regulatory check if needed
> + * @netdev: the device to check
> + *
> + * In case the device supports NO_IR or DFS relaxations, schedule regulatory
> + * channels check, as previous concurrent operation conditions may not
> + * hold anymore.
> + */
...
> +void cfg80211_schedule_channels_check(struct net_device *netdev)
> +{
> + struct wireless_dev *wdev = netdev->ieee80211_ptr;
> + struct wiphy *wiphy = wdev->wiphy;
> +
> + /* Schedule channels check if NO_IR or DFS relaxations are supported */
> + if (wdev->iftype == NL80211_IFTYPE_STATION &&
> + (wiphy_ext_feature_isset(wiphy,
> + NL80211_EXT_FEATURE_DFS_CONCURRENT) ||
> + (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CFG80211_REG_RELAX_NO_IR) &&
> + wiphy->regulatory_flags & REGULATORY_ENABLE_RELAX_NO_IR)))
> + reg_check_channels();
> +}
That ... doesn't even use the netdev pointer, apart from going to the
wiphy? Why not have a wiphy argument instead?
johannes
