From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D085735838A; Mon, 9 Mar 2026 07:08:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773040139; cv=none; b=nRpEGovPhRd2S+vidabzTRiw7ILJrXXTtV/2nVkSZE66E76PCgWncVw3RYQTxo6xWFGp9SrcqtWEd6PD0ltdRoaN8Zzj4MbPn0nR5SPFNBBZOFT2c3mvBg4IrCE/YXdQWhgHpt9033oRZ+ePOKLE5cJjTyxPFQuTvpb5CogWlX8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773040139; c=relaxed/simple; bh=XpY/t2PZhWdNCbnz6i8Ww/rhyBIIvWSYrY+/h+T7duw=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=vAOx0X6INoDcfZY3kpssjtlP2kPaLl9Etkr0Xj/QZTOBveUAbfoMNMW3E8N71fWqTvIe3f4Lqyo9R5eavs7YoNpK3gKb/gEIw/JM0A7DITtdRZdxir0qa6BPfHpAwhXjm9q2a/hxyDfbZJObqRdDVIcjh0PMdPCyFfIivbEc0vI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=Ts24dMm/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="Ts24dMm/" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=gZMGKabdYzeLfhDsJ1Db2AbYSD4HGbVvgVYnxD/7438=; t=1773040137; x=1774249737; b=Ts24dMm/JUDSgVn3dstv2ECeC3tTZIS9M6rfLsKqguPyFgv PDVLE2M3KXsqNepw9aVA19ccVjfRqiQIfV1Q4LvJmJtIM8Y3ThaGjjzqkKzjjP/Ps1x0IMKXARfh1 W6GydgtwoOo+I0GNWKGUMNxQamWprUb08jFrprumN7rgQKJf0nPVzNCqoDhdwtvyLcZSqkcD6txDs 4gI/uXF6lxflvnX3ZsbZErR1W8wjPlkDvf4Sl1t9mEUTKLmYuLl4zyshUJuLGmMY1CTyHgs2VQ4cM c5Ut++cAOBMiZZygb4IKYKLdvR86s4smOBT5QGiVVnAVeoUmMXq70Ygy5UhUvOSg==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1vzUjW-0000000Clsm-0APJ; Mon, 09 Mar 2026 08:08:54 +0100 Message-ID: <1ca86ec4a1af1edfb791ca65023ab1979507c5bc.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH wireless-next 14/35] wifi: mm81x: add mac.c From: Johannes Berg To: Lachlan Hodges Cc: Dan Callaghan , Arien Judge , Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers , Bill Wendling , Justin Stitt , ayman.grais@morsemicro.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2026 08:08:53 +0100 In-Reply-To: (sfid-20260309_054337_596627_E09272CA) References: <20260227041108.66508-1-lachlan.hodges@morsemicro.com> <20260227041108.66508-15-lachlan.hodges@morsemicro.com> (sfid-20260309_054337_596627_E09272CA) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.58.3 (3.58.3-1.fc43) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Mon, 2026-03-09 at 15:43 +1100, Lachlan Hodges wrote: > > 2) Are you going to incur the wrath of mm/ folks, where instances of > > 'struct mm_struct' are commonly called 'mm'? I can find a few > > examples of others (struct drm_buddy *mm, struct mqd_manager *mm), > > but you'd double the instances. >=20 > This.. is definitely something I did not think of. I have no issue with > renaming to something else.. maybe mx? I'm not sure. Yeah I really don't know. There's no 'mm->lock' (any more? for some reason _that_ was what caught my eye wrt. the naming) in mm/, and I guess soon also not in your driver. I'll try to ask around, but it's probably safer to rename, and shouldn't be _that_ hard with spatch I guess. I guess 'mx' seems reasonable, 'mmx' is also confusing perhaps, and 'mm81x' doesn't lend itself to obvious other abbreviations. > > > + /* > > > + * mm81x only support changing/setting the channel > > > + * when we create an interface. > > > + */ > > > + if (WARN_ON(changed & IEEE80211_CHANCTX_CHANGE_CHANNEL)) > > > + mm81x_err(mm, "Changing channel via chanctx not supported"); > >=20 > > Wait, what, why do you have chanctx support then? This seems highly > > questionable, how do you not run into this all the time? > >=20 > > If it just has a single, wouldn't the chanctx emulation suit the driver > > better, and that'd make this more obvious? Hmm, but you _do_ support > > multiple vifs? I'm confused. >=20 > We originally used chanctx emulation.. but I suppose in an effort to > be "modern" we use chanctx. It's probably best to switch back to the > chanctx emulation anyway. As for why we don't run into this is due > to no channel switch support yet, iirc mac80211 I think needs a minor > tweak to work with S1G (which further reinforces the idea that we > should just emulate chanctx) I don't mind the emulation _that_ much to force drivers into some unnatural scheme for them :) This seems even more confusing and unexpected than the emulation perhaps. But I don't want to impose here either. > Thanks for the review. On the other thread [1] you mentioned sending a > pull request once reviews settle down, as per the documentation in [2] > (which I should have read earlier... :) ), Heh, I didn't really know we had that document either, Kalle did all that :) > can we confirm that this means > we are to submit subsequent patchset revisions in the same per-file > format until everyone is happy with the driver, and then raise the PR? I wouldn't necessarily way _everyone_, you can probably always find someone willing to nitpick if you look hard enough ;-) But yeah, I don't think you have a choice for how to post, the whole driver as one patch would not really even load well in an email client I guess, let alone make it possible to comment on easily. As I said there, for the merge I'd prefer just a single commit as a pull request. Obviously I hope/expect you're going to continue to maintaining the driver and we'll have to figure out the workflow for that - perhaps depending on how much work you're planning to put into it. johannes