From: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>
To: Mehmet Fide <mehmet.fide@gmail.com>
Cc: Luka Gejak <luka.gejak@linux.dev>,
Bitterblue Smith <rtl8821cerfe2@gmail.com>,
"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"mehmet.fide@screeningeagle.com" <mehmet.fide@screeningeagle.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH rtw-next v3 2/2] wifi: rtw88: support channel switch in AP mode
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2026 01:26:05 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <151d3d60da614e00b3a94bebd4f4f3a8@realtek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261005143523.130287-3-mehmet.fide@gmail.com>
Mehmet Fide <mehmet.fide@gmail.com> wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.c
> index 3cd17a3bb494..5e68ba73548a 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.c
> @@ -1802,14 +1802,73 @@ int rtw_fw_download_rsvd_page(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev)
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static struct ieee80211_vif *rtw_fw_beacon_vif(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev)
There is single one caller, so just squash into rtw_fw_csa_active().
I asked to move CS work to vif, because I want to avoid this kind of
getting vif from rsvd_pkt->rtwvif. Is there any way to avoid this?
> +{
> + struct rtw_rsvd_page *rsvd_pkt;
> +
> + rsvd_pkt = list_first_entry_or_null(&rtwdev->rsvd_page_list,
> + struct rtw_rsvd_page, build_list);
> + if (!rsvd_pkt || rsvd_pkt->type != RSVD_BEACON)
> + return NULL;
> +
> + return rtwvif_to_vif(rsvd_pkt->rtwvif);
> +}
> +
> +bool rtw_fw_csa_active(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev)
> +{
> + struct ieee80211_vif *vif = rtw_fw_beacon_vif(rtwdev);
> +
> + return vif && vif->bss_conf.csa_active;
> +}
> +
> void rtw_fw_update_beacon_work(struct work_struct *work)
> {
> struct rtw_dev *rtwdev = container_of(work, struct rtw_dev,
> update_beacon_work);
>
> mutex_lock(&rtwdev->mutex);
> +
> + if (rtw_fw_csa_active(rtwdev))
> + goto out;
> +
> rtw_fw_download_rsvd_page(rtwdev);
> rtw_send_rsvd_page_h2c(rtwdev);
> +
> +out:
> + mutex_unlock(&rtwdev->mutex);
> +}
> +
[...]
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.h b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.h
> index 48ad9ceab6ea..a0a1dcbf93de 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.h
> @@ -863,7 +863,9 @@ void rtw_add_rsvd_page_pno(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev,
> void rtw_add_rsvd_page_sta(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev,
> struct rtw_vif *rtwvif);
> int rtw_fw_download_rsvd_page(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev);
> +bool rtw_fw_csa_active(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev);
> void rtw_fw_update_beacon_work(struct work_struct *work);
> +void rtw_fw_csa_beacon_work(struct wiphy *wiphy, struct wiphy_work *work);
> void rtw_send_rsvd_page_h2c(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev);
> int rtw_dump_drv_rsvd_page(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev,
> u32 offset, u32 size, u32 *buf);
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c
> b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c
> index 2a9b09fa76e7..4c5be1bd9875 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c
> @@ -164,6 +164,9 @@ static int rtw_ops_add_interface(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
> memset(&rtwvif->bfee, 0, sizeof(struct rtw_bfee));
> rtw_txq_init(rtwdev, vif->txq);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&rtwvif->rsvd_page_list);
> + if (!test_bit(RTW_FLAG_RESTARTING, rtwdev->flags))
Will it be a problem just unconditionally initializing csa work?
> + wiphy_delayed_work_init(&rtwvif->csa_beacon_work,
> + rtw_fw_csa_beacon_work);
>
> mutex_lock(&rtwdev->mutex);
>
> @@ -235,6 +238,8 @@ static void rtw_ops_remove_interface(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
> rtw_dbg(rtwdev, RTW_DBG_STATE, "stop vif %pM mac_id %d on port %d\n",
> vif->addr, rtwvif->mac_id, rtwvif->port);
>
> + wiphy_delayed_work_cancel(hw->wiphy, &rtwvif->csa_beacon_work);
> +
> mutex_lock(&rtwdev->mutex);
>
> rtw_leave_lps_deep(rtwdev);
> @@ -438,6 +443,13 @@ static void rtw_ops_bss_info_changed(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
> rtw_set_dtim_period(rtwdev, conf->dtim_period);
> rtw_fw_download_rsvd_page(rtwdev);
> rtw_send_rsvd_page_h2c(rtwdev);
> + if (conf->csa_active) {
> + u32 interval = ieee80211_tu_to_usec(conf->beacon_int);
> +
> + wiphy_delayed_work_queue(hw->wiphy,
> + &rtwvif->csa_beacon_work,
> + usecs_to_jiffies(interval));
> + }
> }
>
> if (changed & BSS_CHANGED_BEACON_ENABLED) {
> @@ -487,8 +499,11 @@ static void rtw_ops_stop_ap(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
> struct ieee80211_vif *vif,
> struct ieee80211_bss_conf *link_conf)
> {
> + struct rtw_vif *rtwvif = (struct rtw_vif *)vif->drv_priv;
> struct rtw_dev *rtwdev = hw->priv;
>
> + wiphy_delayed_work_cancel(hw->wiphy, &rtwvif->csa_beacon_work);
> +
> mutex_lock(&rtwdev->mutex);
> rtw_write32_clr(rtwdev, REG_TCR, BIT_TCR_UPDATE_HGQMD);
> rtw_write16(rtwdev, REG_ATIMWND, ATIMWND_DEFAULT);
> @@ -556,6 +571,17 @@ static int rtw_ops_set_tim(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct ieee80211_sta *sta,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static void rtw_ops_channel_switch_beacon(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
> + struct ieee80211_vif *vif,
> + struct cfg80211_chan_def *chandef)
> +{
> + u32 interval = ieee80211_tu_to_usec(vif->bss_conf.beacon_int);
> + struct rtw_vif *rtwvif = (struct rtw_vif *)vif->drv_priv;
> +
> + wiphy_delayed_work_queue(hw->wiphy, &rtwvif->csa_beacon_work,
> + usecs_to_jiffies(interval));
> +}
> +
> static int rtw_ops_set_key(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, enum set_key_cmd cmd,
> struct ieee80211_vif *vif, struct ieee80211_sta *sta,
> struct ieee80211_key_conf *key)
> @@ -626,7 +652,8 @@ static int rtw_ops_set_key(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, enum set_key_cmd cmd,
> }
>
> /* download new cam settings for PG to backup */
> - if (rtw_get_lps_deep_mode(rtwdev) == LPS_DEEP_MODE_PG)
> + if (rtw_get_lps_deep_mode(rtwdev) == LPS_DEEP_MODE_PG &&
> + !rtw_fw_csa_active(rtwdev))
As the comment, this is to download new CAM settings. If CSA is ongoning,
you ignore the download. Then, my question is when will you download
this properly?
> rtw_fw_download_rsvd_page(rtwdev);
>
> out:
> @@ -839,6 +866,14 @@ static int rtw_ops_get_antenna(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
> }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_PM
> +static void rtw_csa_cancel_iter(void *data, struct ieee80211_vif *vif)
> +{
> + struct rtw_vif *rtwvif = (struct rtw_vif *)vif->drv_priv;
> + struct rtw_dev *rtwdev = data;
> +
> + wiphy_delayed_work_cancel(rtwdev->hw->wiphy, &rtwvif->csa_beacon_work);
> +}
> +
> static int rtw_ops_suspend(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
> struct cfg80211_wowlan *wowlan)
> {
> @@ -846,6 +881,7 @@ static int rtw_ops_suspend(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
> int ret;
>
> mutex_lock(&rtwdev->mutex);
> + rtw_iterate_vifs(rtwdev, rtw_csa_cancel_iter, rtwdev);
I'm thinking if we move back csa work to rtwdev (like v2) to avoid this kind of
iterative.
> ret = rtw_wow_suspend(rtwdev, wowlan);
> if (ret)
> rtw_err(rtwdev, "failed to suspend for wow %d\n", ret);
> @@ -887,10 +923,19 @@ static void rtw_reconfig_complete(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
> mutex_unlock(&rtwdev->mutex);
> }
>
> +static void rtw_csa_active_iter(void *data, struct ieee80211_vif *vif)
> +{
> + bool *csa_active = data;
> +
> + if (vif->bss_conf.csa_active)
> + *csa_active = true;
> +}
> +
> static int rtw_ops_hw_scan(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct ieee80211_vif *vif,
> struct ieee80211_scan_request *req)
> {
> struct rtw_dev *rtwdev = hw->priv;
> + bool csa_active = false;
> int ret;
>
> if (!rtw_fw_feature_check(&rtwdev->fw, FW_FEATURE_SCAN_OFFLOAD))
> @@ -900,6 +945,13 @@ static int rtw_ops_hw_scan(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct ieee80211_vif *vif,
> return -EBUSY;
>
> mutex_lock(&rtwdev->mutex);
> +
> + rtw_iterate_vifs(rtwdev, rtw_csa_active_iter, &csa_active);
and avoid this iterative.
> + if (csa_active) {
> + mutex_unlock(&rtwdev->mutex);
> + return -EBUSY;
> + }
> +
> rtw_hw_scan_start(rtwdev, vif, req);
> ret = rtw_hw_scan_offload(rtwdev, vif, true);
> if (ret) {
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-06 1:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-05 14:35 [PATCH rtw-next v3 0/2] wifi: rtw88: " Mehmet Fide
2026-10-05 14:35 ` [PATCH rtw-next v3 1/2] wifi: rtw88: download the beacon the reserved page was built with Mehmet Fide
2026-10-05 17:36 ` Luka Gejak
2026-10-06 7:46 ` Mehmet Fide
2026-10-05 14:35 ` [PATCH rtw-next v3 2/2] wifi: rtw88: support channel switch in AP mode Mehmet Fide
2026-10-05 17:33 ` [PATCH " Luka Gejak
2026-10-06 7:46 ` [PATCH rtw-next " Mehmet Fide
2026-10-06 1:26 ` Ping-Ke Shih [this message]
2026-10-06 7:46 ` Mehmet Fide
2026-10-06 7:54 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2026-10-06 8:16 ` Mehmet Fide
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-10-05 14:33 [PATCH rtw-next v3 0/2] wifi: rtw88: " Mehmet Fide
2026-10-05 14:33 ` [PATCH rtw-next v3 2/2] wifi: rtw88: support " Mehmet Fide
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=151d3d60da614e00b3a94bebd4f4f3a8@realtek.com \
--to=pkshih@realtek.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luka.gejak@linux.dev \
--cc=mehmet.fide@gmail.com \
--cc=mehmet.fide@screeningeagle.com \
--cc=rtl8821cerfe2@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®