Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless+bounces-5274-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Message-ID: <5d306110-ec5d-442e-9193-462176de3a2a@quicinc.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 14:08:55 +0530
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: mac80211: validate link status before deciding on
 off channel Tx
Content-Language: en-US
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
CC: <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>, Sriram R <quic_srirrama@quicinc.com>
References: <20240312154620.242773-1-quic_adisi@quicinc.com>
 <2c8338a29d3c42ebbf1fd5efd348c14471fa5004.camel@sipsolutions.net>
 <bc2422eb-efae-423e-b60a-2aa0a3ea94fb@quicinc.com>
 <cd8f0071-1033-46b8-b7d7-3140079e8a5a@quicinc.com>
 <5576f8160e7d4b707fe2dc3681721cb49dfeec5d.camel@sipsolutions.net>
From: Aditya Kumar Singh <quic_adisi@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <5576f8160e7d4b707fe2dc3681721cb49dfeec5d.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 3/26/24 13:12, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-03-26 at 11:27 +0530, Aditya Kumar Singh wrote:
>> On 3/26/24 09:58, Aditya Kumar Singh wrote:
>>>> Can you fix
>>>> that too? And if you fix that ... yeah we probably still should have
>>>> this patch but ... _without_ this:
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sure let me try to fix that as well. So here's what Im planning -
>>> 1. Separate the ether_addr changes into a separate independent patch.
>>> 2. Patch series to fix the active flag handling at link level.
>>
>> Upon checking further, I see -
>>
>> If we fix the setting of the flag only when first link comes up and
>> reset it only when last link is removed, then probably there is no need
>> to add separate handler - ieee80211_is_link_bss_active() to check if
>> any one link is active or not.
>>
>> FWIW, the purpose of the new function introduced is to check if at least
>> one of the link is active. And now if the flag is set, this ultimately
>> means that one link is at least active. So we do not need to go and
>> check in each link again right?
>>
> Yes, which is why I even noticed the whole mess with 'active'.
> 
> johannes

Sure, then I will just try to fix the sdata->bss->active flag usage and 
send a patch soon.