Karthikeyan Periyasamy <quic_periyasa@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> To support multi link operation, we need to combine all the link/pdev
> under a single wiphy. This avoids the overhead of synchronization
> across multiple hardware instances in both the cfg80211 and mac80211
> layers. Currently, each link/pdev is registered as separate wiphy,
> tightly coupled with link/pdev/radio (ar) structure. To enable single
> wiphy registration within the chip, we decouple the wiphy data entity from
> the link/pdev/radio (ar) structure and move it under the chip (ab)
> structure with a new data container (ath12k_hw) structure. This approach
> improves scalability for future multi link operation support.
What about struct ath12k_pdev? Do we need it still or should it be removed?
> static void ath12k_mac_op_cancel_hw_scan(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
> struct ieee80211_vif *vif)
> {
> - struct ath12k *ar = hw->priv;
> + struct ath12k_hw *ah = ath12k_hw_to_ah(hw);
> + struct ath12k *ar;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&ah->conf_mutex);
> +
> + ar = ath12k_ah_to_ar(ah);
>
> mutex_lock(&ar->conf_mutex);
> ath12k_scan_abort(ar);
> mutex_unlock(&ar->conf_mutex);
>
> + mutex_unlock(&ah->conf_mutex);
> +
> cancel_delayed_work_sync(&ar->scan.timeout);
> }
Do we really need two mutexes? I don't see any analysis about that. And
even if we do, I feel that it should be added in a separate patch.
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
