Lingbo Kong <quic_lingbok@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 2024/4/25 18:37, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Lingbo Kong <quic_lingbok@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> Currently, the transmit rate of "iw dev xxx station dump" command
>>> always show an invalid value.
>>>
>>> To address this issue, ath12k parse the info of transmit complete
>>> report from firmware and indicate the transmit rate to mac80211.
>>>
>>> This patch affects the station mode of WCN7850 and QCN9274.
>>>
>>> After that, "iw dev xxx station dump" show the correct transmit rate.
>>> Such as:
>>>
>>> Station 00:03:7f:12:03:03 (on wlo1)
>>> inactive time: 872 ms
>>> rx bytes: 219111
>>> rx packets: 1133
>>> tx bytes: 53767
>>> tx packets: 462
>>> tx retries: 51
>>> tx failed: 0
>>> beacon loss: 0
>>> beacon rx: 403
>>> rx drop misc: 74
>>> signal: -95 dBm
>>> beacon signal avg: -18 dBm
>>> tx bitrate: 1441.1 MBit/s 80MHz EHT-MCS 13 EHT-NSS 2 EHT-GI 0
>>>
>>> Tested-on: WCN7850 hw2.0 PCI WLAN.HMT.1.0.c5-00481-QCAHMTSWPL_V1.0_V2.0_SILICONZ-3
>>> Tested-on: QCN9274 hw2.0 PCI WLAN.WBE.1.2.1-00201-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lingbo Kong <quic_lingbok@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> [...]
>>
>>> +static void ath12k_dp_tx_update(struct ath12k *ar, struct hal_tx_status *ts)
>>> +{
>>> + if (ar->last_ppdu_id != 0) {
>>> + if (ar->last_ppdu_id == ts->ppdu_id ||
>>> + ar->cached_ppdu_id == ar->last_ppdu_id)
>>> + ar->cached_ppdu_id = ar->last_ppdu_id;
>>> +
>>> + ath12k_dp_tx_update_txcompl(ar, ts);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + ar->last_ppdu_id = ts->ppdu_id;
>>> +}
>> A code comment would help a lot. Why is ar->cached_ppdu_id needed
>> here?
>> And if 'ar->cached_ppdu_id == ar->last_ppdu_id' is true why do then
>> do
>> 'ar->cached_ppdu_id = ar->last_ppdu_id'? The value of ar->cached_ppdu_id
>> is not changing here (unless I'm missing something).
>> Also I'm worried about locking. How is access to ar->last_ppdu_id
>> and
>> ar->cached_ppdu_id protected?
>>
>
> Thanks for pointing to this.
> you're right, the ar->cached_ppdu_id haven't used in here, so need to
> delete it.
> i missed something in here.
>
> So, change the ath12k_dp_tx_update(struct ath12k *ar, struct
> hal_tx_status *ts) to
> static void ath12k_dp_tx_update(struct ath12k *ar, struct hal_tx_status *ts)
> {
> if (ts->flags & HAL_TX_STATUS_FLAGS_FIRST_MSDU) {
> if (ar->last_ppdu_id != 0)
> ath12k_dp_tx_update_txcompl(ar, ts);
> ar->last_ppdu_id = ts->ppdu_id;
> }
> }
Access to ar->last_ppdu_id still looks racy to me.
And why do we need to track last_ppdu_id? I don't have time to start
investigating that right now, a code comment explaining that would help
a lot.
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
