Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <c28b9240-c45e-c8cd-ece7-d967da93896c@quicinc.com>
Date:   Tue, 13 Sep 2022 12:29:44 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.12.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: mac80211: RCU-ify link STA pointers
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>
CC:     Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
        linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        <ath11k@lists.infradead.org>
References: <24df3a0c-a312-d9b6-5840-1eacd79d824b@quicinc.com>
 <87a67498b4.fsf@kernel.org>
 <7199bd7d-b45c-5c72-576e-363ad37cce82@quicinc.com>
 <875yhs97kg.fsf@kernel.org>
From:   Wen Gong <quic_wgong@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <875yhs97kg.fsf@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

Please ignore this mail which is not really for patch review.

On 9/12/2022 7:05 PM, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Wen Gong <quic_wgong@quicinc.com> writes:
>
>> On 9/12/2022 6:49 PM, Kalle Valo wrote:
>>> Wen Gong <quic_wgong@quicinc.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Hi Johannes,
>>>>
>>>> Currently for MLO test, the others links's rx_nss of struct
>>>> ieee80211_link_sta is still value 0 in ieee80211_set_associated(),
>>>> becaue they are not pass into ieee80211_sta_set_rx_nss() in
>>>> mac80211 except the deflink which means the primary link.
>>>> This lead driver get nss = 0 for other links. Will you fix it
>>>> or is it design by default?
>>>>
>>>> Only primary link has valid rx_nss value which is not 0 by below call stack.
>>>> ieee80211_assoc_success()->
>>>>       rate_control_rate_init(sta);
>>>>
>>>> commit:c71420db653aba30a234d1e4cf86dde376e604fa
>>>> wifi: mac80211: RCU-ify link STA pointers
>>> Strange format and s-o-b missing. Was this meant as an RFC patch?
>> This is not a patch for review, it is to ask some question about the patch
>>
>> "wifi: mac80211: RCU-ify link STA pointers" which is already upstream.
> Then you should not add "[PATCH]" in the subject. The string "[PATCH]"
> is supposed to inform that the email contains a patch which should be
> applied.
>