Return-path: Received: from emh06.mail.saunalahti.fi ([62.142.5.116]:58463 "EHLO emh06.mail.saunalahti.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751297AbaB1MRY (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:17:24 -0500 Message-ID: <1393589841.13669.32.camel@dubbel> (sfid-20140228_131733_504191_127F557F) Subject: Re: [RFC v2 3/4] mac80211: allow reservation of a running chanctx From: Luca Coelho To: Michal Kazior Cc: linux-wireless , Johannes Berg , sw@simonwunderlich.de, "Otcheretianski, Andrei" Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 14:17:21 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <1393512081-31453-1-git-send-email-luca@coelho.fi> <1393512081-31453-4-git-send-email-luca@coelho.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 16:29 +0100, Michal Kazior wrote: > On 27 February 2014 15:41, Luca Coelho wrote: > > From: Luciano Coelho > > > > With single-channel drivers, we need to be able to change a running > > chanctx if we want to use chanctx reservation. Not all drivers may be > > able to do this, so add a flag that indicates support for it. > > > > Changing a running chanctx can also be used as an optimization in > > multi-channel drivers when the context needs to be reserved for future > > usage. > > I think this can be generalized (not necessarily in this very patch). > Since you've moved combination checks into mac80211 you can easily > check how many channels you can have with current iftype setup. This > means you can know beforehand if you can create a new chanctx or have > to attempt a chanctx channel switch. That's the idea. I'm keeping both series separate, but when they get applied, I will use the combinations check for chanctx reservation. > > Introduce IEEE80211_CHANCTX_RESERVED chanctx mode to mark a channel as > > reserved so nobody else can use it (since we know it's going to > > change). In the future, we may allow several vifs to use the same > > reservation as long as they plan to use the chanctx on the same > > future channel. > > I don't really think you need a separate mode for that. > > Since reserved_chanctx is protected by chanctx_mtx you can safely > iterate over interfaces and check if any vif is reserving the same > chanctx it is assigned to. I think it's much simpler to keep this new mode. Reserved channel contexts are almost like exclusive contexts (as I was doing in my first RFC), but not exactly the same, since they can be used for other reservations. > > @@ -622,7 +629,9 @@ int ieee80211_vif_unreserve_chanctx(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata) > > if (WARN_ON(!sdata->reserved_chanctx)) > > return -EINVAL; > > > > - if (--sdata->reserved_chanctx->refcount == 0) > > + if (sdata->reserved_chanctx->mode == IEEE80211_CHANCTX_RESERVED) > > + sdata->reserved_chanctx->mode = sdata->reserved_mode; > > + else if (--sdata->reserved_chanctx->refcount == 0) > > ieee80211_free_chanctx(sdata->local, sdata->reserved_chanctx); > > > > sdata->reserved_chanctx = NULL; > > @@ -652,19 +661,42 @@ int ieee80211_vif_reserve_chanctx(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata, > > /* try to find another context with the chandef we want */ > > new_ctx = ieee80211_find_chanctx(local, chandef, > > IEEE80211_CHANCTX_SHARED); > > - if (!new_ctx) { > > - /* create a new context */ > > + if (new_ctx) { > > + /* reserve the existing compatible context */ > > + sdata->reserved_chanctx = new_ctx; > > + new_ctx->refcount++; > > + } else if (curr_ctx->refcount == 1 && > > + (local->hw.flags & IEEE80211_HW_CHANGE_RUNNING_CHANCTX)) { > > + /* TODO: when implementing support for multiple > > + * interfaces switching at the same time, we may want > > + * other vifs to reserve it as well, as long as > > + * they're planning to switch to the same channel. In > > + * that case, we probably have to save the future > > + * chandef and the reserved_mode in the context > > + * itself. > > + */ > > We already save the future chandef (csa_chandef). reserved_mode is not > necessary as per my comment above. Again, if you guarantee csa_chandef > to be set under chanctx_mtx you can safely iterate over interfaces and > calculate compat chandef. But the calculated "compat chandef" is not exactly what was required in the first place. In sdata->u.bss_conf.chandef we need to have the chandef we want for *this* vif. We need this to recalculate the combined chandef if, for instance, another vif leaves our chanctx. I think we should keep saving the reserved_chandef in sdata (the one that was requested when making the reservation) and also save the future chandef as a compat combination of all the reservations for that chanctx. You're right that we already have the future chandef. I just added it as "reserved_chandef" in the previous patch. ;) I'll reword this. Thanks a lot for your reviews and comments! -- Cheers, Luca.