On 3/25/2024 8:24 AM, Rameshkumar Sundaram wrote:
> On 3/22/2024 1:24 AM, Jeff Johnson wrote:
>> On 3/20/2024 12:09 PM, Rameshkumar Sundaram wrote:
>>> From: Sriram R <quic_srirrama@xxxxxxxxxxx>
...
>>> ret = ath12k_wmi_vdev_delete(ar, arvif->vdev_id);
>>> if (ret) {
>>> - ath12k_warn(ab, "failed to delete WMI vdev %d: %d\n",
>>> + ath12k_warn(ab, "failed to delete WMI scan vdev %d: %d\n",
>>
>> this change seems strange. isn't ath12k_mac_vdev_delete() called from both the
>> scan logic and from the normal ath12k_mac_op_remove_interface(), so it might
>> not be a scan vdev that is being deleted?
>>
> No, in Single wiphy, the vdev logic creation for an arvif is such that
> at any given point of time only one vdev is created for an arvif (either
> by ath12k_mac_op_add_intf/assign_chanctx/hw_scan).
> Vdev created by mac_op_scan can either be re-used or deleted &
> re-created (on a different ar) by mac_op_assign_chanctx() if required.
> Also once mac_op_assign_chanctx has started the vdev of an arvif,
> mac_op_hw_scan can only use that vdev. So mac_op_remove just simply
> deletes the one that is currently created.
then if this function is only ever used to delete a scan vdev, then shouldn't
the name be changed to reflect that? the current generic name doesn't reflect
that specificity.
/jeff
