> From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 4:32 PM
> To: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx; kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx; francesco@xxxxxxxxxx; Pete
> Hsieh <tsung-hsien.hsieh@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v2] wifi: mwifiex: avoid AP and STA running on
> different channel
>
> Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or
> opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report
> this email' button
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 08:19:59AM +0000, David Lin wrote:
> > > From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 4:00 PM
> > > To: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@xxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx; kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx; francesco@xxxxxxxxxx;
> > > Pete Hsieh <tsung-hsien.hsieh@xxxxxxx>
> > > Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v2] wifi: mwifiex: avoid AP and STA
> > > running on different channel
> > >
> > > Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking
> > > links or opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message
> > > using the 'Report this email' button
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 01:52:02AM +0000, David Lin wrote:
> > > > > From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 5:05 AM
> > > > > To: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > Cc: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > > > linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > > > kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx; francesco@xxxxxxxxxx; Pete Hsieh
> > > > > <tsung-hsien.hsieh@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v2] wifi: mwifiex: avoid AP and STA
> > > > > running on different channel
> > > > >
> > > > > Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when
> > > > > clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, report the
> > > > > message using the 'Report this email' button
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 04:43:11PM +0800, David Lin wrote:
> > > > > > Current firmware doesn't support AP and STA running on
> > > > > > different channels simultaneously.
> > > > > > FW crash would occur in such case.
> > > > > > This patch avoids the issue by disabling AP and STA to run on
> > > > > > different channels.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >
> > > > > > v2:
> > > > > > - clean up code.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > .../net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/cfg80211.c | 17 ++++---
> > > > > > drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/util.c | 44
> > > +++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > > drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/util.h | 13 ++++++
> > > > > > 3 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/cfg80211.c
> > > > > > b/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/cfg80211.c
> > > > > > index 722ead51e912..3dbcab463445 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/cfg80211.c
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/cfg80211.c
> > > > > > @@ -781,11 +781,9 @@
> mwifiex_cfg80211_set_wiphy_params(struct
> > > > > > wiphy
> > > > > *wiphy, u32 changed)
> > > > > > break;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > case MWIFIEX_BSS_ROLE_STA:
> > > > > > - if (priv->media_connected) {
> > > > > > - mwifiex_dbg(adapter, ERROR,
> > > > > > - "cannot change wiphy
> params
> > > > > when connected");
> > > > > > - return -EINVAL;
> > > > > > - }
> > > > > > + if (priv->media_connected)
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > >
> > > > > This hunk seems unrelated to this patch. If this is needed then
> > > > > it deserves an extra patch along with an explanation why this is
> necessary.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sascha
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Without this hunk, AP and STA can't run on the same channel if
> > > > some wiphy parameters are setting.
> > >
> > > Ok, I now see where you are aiming at. Here's the problematic function:
> > >
> > > > static int
> > > > mwifiex_cfg80211_set_wiphy_params(struct wiphy *wiphy, u32 changed)
> {
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > priv = mwifiex_get_priv(adapter, MWIFIEX_BSS_ROLE_ANY);
> > > >
> > > > switch (priv->bss_role) {
> > > > case MWIFIEX_BSS_ROLE_UAP:
> > > > if (priv->bss_started) {
> > > > mwifiex_dbg(adapter, ERROR,
> > > > "cannot change wiphy params
> > > when bss started");
> > > > return -EINVAL;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > > > mwifiex_send_cmd(priv,
> > > HostCmd_CMD_UAP_SYS_CONFIG, ...);
> > > >
> > > > break;
> > > > case MWIFIEX_BSS_ROLE_STA:
> > > > if (priv->media_connected) {
> > > > mwifiex_dbg(adapter, ERROR,
> > > > "cannot change wiphy params
> > > when connected");
> > > > return -EINVAL;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > > > mwifiex_send_cmd(priv,
> > > HostCmd_CMD_802_11_SNMP_MIB,
> > > > ...);
> > > >
> > > > break;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > return 0;
> > > > }
> > >
> > > This function is for setting wiphy params like rts_threshold and others.
> > >
> > > mwifiex_get_priv(adapter, MWIFIEX_BSS_ROLE_ANY) returns the first
> > > priv which by default is in station mode. Now if you start priv0 in
> > > station mode, then afterwards start priv1 in AP mode *and* have
> > > rts_threshold = xy in your config, then you run into the "cannot change
> wiphy params when connected"
> > > case.
> > >
> > > I really wonder if the settings done in this function are per priv or per
> adapter.
> > > Is there one rts_threshold setting in a mwifiex chip or are there
> > > multiple (per vif/priv)?
> > >
> > > If it's a global setting, then why are we interested in the
> > > media_connected state of one specific priv? Shouldn't we check all privs?
> > >
> > > If it's a setting per priv, then why do we choose the same priv
> > > everytime in this function?
> > >
> > > Either way, this function looks fishy and changing it should be done
> > > with an explanation, just dropping the error message and returning
> > > success is not enough.
> > >
> > > Sascha
> > >
> > > --
> >
> > O.K. I will add comment in patch v3.
>
> Really I hoped that you could clarify a bit how this function works and answer
> some of the questions I raised above. That could help us to get a better driver
> over time. The same code is in the nxpwifi driver as well, so it's not only a
> matter of which driver we decide to maintain in the future.
>
> Sascha
>
I will add the comment in patch v3. I am busy on other stuffs.
David
