RE: [RFC -v2] wifi: rtw88: sdio: Tx status for management frames

[Ping-Ke Shih]

Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Ping-Ke,
> 
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 6:30 AM Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> [...]
> > > @@ -718,10 +718,7 @@ static u8 rtw_sdio_get_tx_qsel(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev, struct sk_buff *skb,
> > >         case RTW_TX_QUEUE_H2C:
> > >                 return TX_DESC_QSEL_H2C;
> > >         case RTW_TX_QUEUE_MGMT:
> > > -               if (rtw_chip_wcpu_11n(rtwdev))
> > > -                       return TX_DESC_QSEL_HIGH;
> > > -               else
> > > -                       return TX_DESC_QSEL_MGMT;
> > > +               return TX_DESC_QSEL_MGMT;
> >
> > Do you remember why you did the special deal with 11n chips?
> > And this RFC looks good to me. (except to commit message, but this is RFC)
> I don't remember - and Jernej said the same thing.
> However, since we got the first 802.11n hardware for testing long
> after this part was written my suggestion is: let's roll this into a
> proper patch, Cc Fiona Klute <fiona.klute@xxxxxx> (author of RTL8723CS
> support) on the resulting patch(es) and then apply the patches
> (assuming nobody observes any problems).
> 
> To make this a non-RFC patch the following steps are needed (in my opinion):
> - split the change into two patches (one which unconditionally calls
> rtw_sdio_indicate_tx_status())
> - another one for the TX_DESC_QSEL_MGMT mapping
> - each of the patches should include their own description
> - I checked the history and it seems that both problems were
> introduced with the original commit, meaning both patches should get
> the following line (above the Signed-off-by): Fixes: 65371a3f14e7
> ("wifi: rtw88: sdio: Add HCI implementation for SDIO based chipsets")
> - (plus anything Ping-Ke has to add :-) )

That's super clear. No other opinion from me.  :-)