Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the wireless-next tree got a conflict in:
drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/tx.c
between commit:
2e57b77583ca ("wifi: iwlwifi: mvm: use correct address 3 in A-MSDU")
from the wireless tree and commit:
3d869feacb74 ("wifi: iwlwifi: mvm: use FW rate for non-data only on new devices")
from the wireless-next tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/tx.c
index 461f26d9214e,4981bb1f0251..000000000000
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/tx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/tx.c
@@@ -520,16 -520,31 +520,41 @@@ static void iwl_mvm_set_tx_cmd_crypto(s
}
}
+static void iwl_mvm_copy_hdr(void *cmd, const void *hdr, int hdrlen,
+ const u8 *addr3_override)
+{
+ struct ieee80211_hdr *out_hdr = cmd;
+
+ memcpy(cmd, hdr, hdrlen);
+ if (addr3_override)
+ memcpy(out_hdr->addr3, addr3_override, ETH_ALEN);
+}
+
+ static bool iwl_mvm_use_host_rate(struct iwl_mvm *mvm,
+ struct iwl_mvm_sta *mvmsta,
+ struct ieee80211_hdr *hdr,
+ struct ieee80211_tx_info *info)
+ {
+ if (unlikely(!mvmsta))
+ return true;
+
+ if (unlikely(info->control.flags & IEEE80211_TX_CTRL_RATE_INJECT))
+ return true;
+
+ if (likely(ieee80211_is_data(hdr->frame_control) &&
+ mvmsta->sta_state >= IEEE80211_STA_AUTHORIZED))
+ return false;
+
+ /*
+ * Not a data frame, use host rate if on an old device that
+ * can't possibly be doing MLO (firmware may be selecting a
+ * bad rate), if we might be doing MLO we need to let FW pick
+ * (since we don't necesarily know the link), but FW rate
+ * selection was fixed.
+ */
+ return mvm->trans->trans_cfg->device_family < IWL_DEVICE_FAMILY_BZ;
+ }
+
/*
* Allocates and sets the Tx cmd the driver data pointers in the skb
*/
Hi,
Thanks for the heads-up!
On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 10:56 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the wireless-next tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/tx.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 2e57b77583ca ("wifi: iwlwifi: mvm: use correct address 3 in A-MSDU")
>
> from the wireless tree and commit:
>
> 3d869feacb74 ("wifi: iwlwifi: mvm: use FW rate for non-data only on new devices")
I had a different (potential) conflict on my radar and pulled wireless
into wireless-next to avoid it, but this one wasn't on my radar at all.
Sorry about that.
> I fixed it up (see below)
That obviously looks fine, thanks!
johannes
Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> writes:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the wireless-next tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/net/wireless/microchip/wilc1000/netdev.c
>
> between commit:
>
> ebfb5e8fc8b4 ("Revert "wifi: wilc1000: convert list management to RCU"")
>
> from the wireless tree and commit:
>
> 6fe46d5c0a84 ("wifi: wilc1000: set net device registration as last
> step during interface creation")
>
> from the wireless-next tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
Thanks. We need to figure out how we solve this conflict, most probably
we'll ask network maintainers to fix it when they pull wireless-next.
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
Kalle Valo <[email protected]> writes:
> Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the wireless-next tree got a conflict in:
>>
>> drivers/net/wireless/microchip/wilc1000/netdev.c
>>
>> between commit:
>>
>> ebfb5e8fc8b4 ("Revert "wifi: wilc1000: convert list management to RCU"")
>>
>> from the wireless tree and commit:
>>
>> 6fe46d5c0a84 ("wifi: wilc1000: set net device registration as last
>> step during interface creation")
>>
>> from the wireless-next tree.
>>
>> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
>> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
>> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
>> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
>> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
>> complex conflicts.
>
> Thanks. We need to figure out how we solve this conflict, most probably
> we'll ask network maintainers to fix it when they pull wireless-next.
Alexis, you know wilc1000 the best. Could you double check the conflict
resolution, it somewhat complicated:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
Hello Kalle, Stephen,
On 6/6/24 12:09, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Kalle Valo <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the wireless-next tree got a conflict in:
>>>
>>> drivers/net/wireless/microchip/wilc1000/netdev.c
>>>
>>> between commit:
>>>
>>> ebfb5e8fc8b4 ("Revert "wifi: wilc1000: convert list management to RCU"")
>>>
>>> from the wireless tree and commit:
>>>
>>> 6fe46d5c0a84 ("wifi: wilc1000: set net device registration as last
>>> step during interface creation")
>>>
>>> from the wireless-next tree.
>>>
>>> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
>>> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
>>> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
>>> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
>>> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
>>> complex conflicts.
>>
>> Thanks. We need to figure out how we solve this conflict, most probably
>> we'll ask network maintainers to fix it when they pull wireless-next.
>
> Alexis, you know wilc1000 the best. Could you double check the conflict
> resolution, it somewhat complicated:>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
>
LGTM, and some quick testing on the linux-next tree with the corresponding merge
commit showed no issue (no RCU warning, and mac address loading fix behaving
properly)
Alexis
--
Alexis Lothoré, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com