RE: [V9 4/9] wifi: mac80211: Add support for WBRF features

[Quan, Evan]

[AMD Official Use Only - General]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, August 21, 2023 5:44 PM
> To: Quan, Evan <Evan.Quan@xxxxxxx>; gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> rafael@xxxxxxxxxx; lenb@xxxxxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx; kuba@xxxxxxxxxx; pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx; Deucher,
> Alexander <Alexander.Deucher@xxxxxxx>; andrew@xxxxxxx;
> rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; quic_jjohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx; horms@xxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Limonciello, Mario
> <Mario.Limonciello@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [V9 4/9] wifi: mac80211: Add support for WBRF features
>
> On Fri, 2023-08-18 at 11:26 +0800, Evan Quan wrote:
> > To support the WBRF mechanism, Wifi adapters utilized in the system
> > must register the frequencies in use(or unregister those frequencies
> > no longer
> > used) via the dedicated calls. So that, other drivers responding to
> > the frequencies can take proper actions to mitigate possible interference.
> >
> > Co-developed-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx>
> > Co-developed-by: Evan Quan <evan.quan@xxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Evan Quan <evan.quan@xxxxxxx>
>
> From WiFi POV, this looks _almost_ fine to me.
>
> > +static void wbrf_get_ranges_from_chandef(struct cfg80211_chan_def
> *chandef,
> > +                                    struct wbrf_ranges_in *ranges_in) {
> > +   u64 start_freq1, end_freq1;
> > +   u64 start_freq2, end_freq2;
> > +   int bandwidth;
> > +
> > +   bandwidth = nl80211_chan_width_to_mhz(chandef->width);
> > +
> > +   get_chan_freq_boundary(chandef->center_freq1,
> > +                          bandwidth,
> > +                          &start_freq1,
> > +                          &end_freq1);
> > +
> > +   ranges_in->band_list[0].start = start_freq1;
> > +   ranges_in->band_list[0].end = end_freq1;
> > +
> > +   if (chandef->width == NL80211_CHAN_WIDTH_80P80) {
> > +           get_chan_freq_boundary(chandef->center_freq2,
> > +                                  bandwidth,
> > +                                  &start_freq2,
> > +                                  &end_freq2);
> > +
> > +           ranges_in->band_list[1].start = start_freq2;
> > +           ranges_in->band_list[1].end = end_freq2;
> > +   }
> > +}
>
> This has to setup ranges_in->num_of_ranges, no?
Yes, better to have that. I add this in V10.
> (Also no real good reason for num_of_ranges to be a u64, btw, since it can
> only go up to 11)
Mainly for data structure alignment. Since other members come with u64.
So, to make the data structure naturally aligned, 'num_of_ranges' also comes with u64.

Evan
>
> With that fixed, you can add
>
> Reviewed-by: Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> johannes