Upcoming SDIO support may sleep in the read/write handlers. Switch
all users of rtw_iterate_vifs_atomic() which are either reading or
writing a register to rtw_iterate_vifs().
Signed-off-by: Martin Blumenstingl <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c | 6 +++---
drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/ps.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c
index c6364837e83b..207161a8f5bd 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c
@@ -229,8 +229,8 @@ static void rtw_watch_dog_work(struct work_struct *work)
rtw_phy_dynamic_mechanism(rtwdev);
data.rtwdev = rtwdev;
- /* use atomic version to avoid taking local->iflist_mtx mutex */
- rtw_iterate_vifs_atomic(rtwdev, rtw_vif_watch_dog_iter, &data);
+
+ rtw_iterate_vifs(rtwdev, rtw_vif_watch_dog_iter, &data);
/* fw supports only one station associated to enter lps, if there are
* more than two stations associated to the AP, then we can not enter
@@ -578,7 +578,7 @@ static void __fw_recovery_work(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev)
rtw_iterate_keys_rcu(rtwdev, NULL, rtw_reset_key_iter, rtwdev);
rcu_read_unlock();
rtw_iterate_stas_atomic(rtwdev, rtw_reset_sta_iter, rtwdev);
- rtw_iterate_vifs_atomic(rtwdev, rtw_reset_vif_iter, rtwdev);
+ rtw_iterate_vifs(rtwdev, rtw_reset_vif_iter, rtwdev);
rtw_enter_ips(rtwdev);
}
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/ps.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/ps.c
index 3f0ac33156d6..95f9060b083f 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/ps.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/ps.c
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ int rtw_leave_ips(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev)
return ret;
}
- rtw_iterate_vifs_atomic(rtwdev, rtw_restore_port_cfg_iter, rtwdev);
+ rtw_iterate_vifs(rtwdev, rtw_restore_port_cfg_iter, rtwdev);
rtw_coex_ips_notify(rtwdev, COEX_IPS_LEAVE);
--
2.32.0
Hello Ping-Ke,
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 7:47 AM Pkshih <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Martin Blumenstingl [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2021 4:41 AM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; Neo Jou; Jernej Skrabec; Martin Blumenstingl
> > Subject: [PATCH RFC v1 2/7] rtw88: Use rtw_iterate_vifs where the iterator reads or writes registers
> >
> > Upcoming SDIO support may sleep in the read/write handlers. Switch
> > all users of rtw_iterate_vifs_atomic() which are either reading or
> > writing a register to rtw_iterate_vifs().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Martin Blumenstingl <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c | 6 +++---
> > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/ps.c | 2 +-
> > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c
> > index c6364837e83b..207161a8f5bd 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c
> > @@ -229,8 +229,8 @@ static void rtw_watch_dog_work(struct work_struct *work)
> > rtw_phy_dynamic_mechanism(rtwdev);
> >
> > data.rtwdev = rtwdev;
> > - /* use atomic version to avoid taking local->iflist_mtx mutex */
> > - rtw_iterate_vifs_atomic(rtwdev, rtw_vif_watch_dog_iter, &data);
> > +
> > + rtw_iterate_vifs(rtwdev, rtw_vif_watch_dog_iter, &data);
>
> You revert the fix of [1].
Thanks for bringing this to my attention!
> I think we can move out rtw_chip_cfg_csi_rate() from rtw_dynamic_csi_rate(), and
> add/set a field cfg_csi_rate to itera data. Then, we do rtw_chip_cfg_csi_rate()
> outside iterate function. Therefore, we can keep the atomic version of iterate_vifs.
just to make sure that I understand this correctly:
rtw_iterate_vifs_atomic can be the iterator as it was before
inside the iterator func I use something like:
iter_data->cfg_csi_rate = rtwvif->bfee.role == RTW_BFEE_SU ||
rtwvif->bfee.role == RTW_BFEE_MU || iter_data->cfg_csi_rate;
(the last iter_data->cfg_csi_rate may read a bit strange, but I think
it's needed because there can be multiple interfaces and if any of
them has cfg_csi_rate true then we need to remember that)
then move the rtw_chip_cfg_csi_rate outside the iterator function,
taking iter_data->cfg_csi_rate to decide whether it needs to be called
Best regards,
Martin
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Blumenstingl [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, July 26, 2021 5:31 AM
> To: Pkshih
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Neo Jou; Jernej
> Skrabec
> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v1 2/7] rtw88: Use rtw_iterate_vifs where the iterator reads or writes registers
>
> Hello Ping-Ke,
>
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 7:47 AM Pkshih <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Martin Blumenstingl [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2021 4:41 AM
> > > To: [email protected]
> > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected];
> > > [email protected]; Neo Jou; Jernej Skrabec; Martin Blumenstingl
> > > Subject: [PATCH RFC v1 2/7] rtw88: Use rtw_iterate_vifs where the iterator reads or writes registers
> > >
> > > Upcoming SDIO support may sleep in the read/write handlers. Switch
> > > all users of rtw_iterate_vifs_atomic() which are either reading or
> > > writing a register to rtw_iterate_vifs().
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Martin Blumenstingl <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c | 6 +++---
> > > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/ps.c | 2 +-
> > > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c
> b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c
> > > index c6364837e83b..207161a8f5bd 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c
> > > @@ -229,8 +229,8 @@ static void rtw_watch_dog_work(struct work_struct *work)
> > > rtw_phy_dynamic_mechanism(rtwdev);
> > >
> > > data.rtwdev = rtwdev;
> > > - /* use atomic version to avoid taking local->iflist_mtx mutex */
> > > - rtw_iterate_vifs_atomic(rtwdev, rtw_vif_watch_dog_iter, &data);
> > > +
> > > + rtw_iterate_vifs(rtwdev, rtw_vif_watch_dog_iter, &data);
> >
> > You revert the fix of [1].
> Thanks for bringing this to my attention!
>
> > I think we can move out rtw_chip_cfg_csi_rate() from rtw_dynamic_csi_rate(), and
> > add/set a field cfg_csi_rate to itera data. Then, we do rtw_chip_cfg_csi_rate()
> > outside iterate function. Therefore, we can keep the atomic version of iterate_vifs.
> just to make sure that I understand this correctly:
> rtw_iterate_vifs_atomic can be the iterator as it was before
> inside the iterator func I use something like:
> iter_data->cfg_csi_rate = rtwvif->bfee.role == RTW_BFEE_SU ||
> rtwvif->bfee.role == RTW_BFEE_MU || iter_data->cfg_csi_rate;
> (the last iter_data->cfg_csi_rate may read a bit strange, but I think
> it's needed because there can be multiple interfaces and if any of
> them has cfg_csi_rate true then we need to remember that)
> then move the rtw_chip_cfg_csi_rate outside the iterator function,
> taking iter_data->cfg_csi_rate to decide whether it needs to be called
>
Yes, you understand correctly.
For the strange part that you mentioned, how about this?
iter_data->cfg_csi_rate |= rtwvif->bfee.role == RTW_BFEE_SU ||
rtwvif->bfee.role == RTW_BFEE_MU;
--
Ping-Ke