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 755E913B5B1 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 15:43:43 +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=1711381424; cv=none; b=dGXZ3HT4xHq6N7YFpBy+p95xaVkn8/yKWVUjhsHrlRUpPr0gtG8jI4Oa4Uf+vEHbhlL/0RJuF4pc9sIYKxjt9NLXA7bFLFl8IMpL7XG3I1y5iFee6x2siI+pu+oHzylhv+dhj1E6x/ElFrMwDUTmYHTdEirmQXR50Bwa28j35z0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711381424; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xwa2f3nknM75qBmMc0nEUshQMPONb3axZRAIcOphsWg=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=Vs3W+Y0Pj5EIjr9QtNHs+N3ne7wJLu1jfj7VvlTalRHnd+F4S6h4EzQEHe/rIP9afxyEFlETN0mqXvK9HhvcgchrRmVo/QbTiZufEnfXYUuvw9jHUHfLJvSccf0jqVcrk6SYBE++M0P18+uyKEVfleUVic1sR+eP8zo2JZMld+A= 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=UKAPQrXF; 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="UKAPQrXF" 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=Sy4fjWaAdBKAu/EG3F3ubpkpdvObIYk8CjnS0nfnncU=; t=1711381423; x=1712591023; b=UKAPQrXF8UFFB0qqu1I1uVYXF3oPCENDQOcumVDpZXpxtff yAAxi51PZXAi9Sjkyzvijl9ZlkL10FWG2u3mpApaZiRgyKz6SacMQs+k4UY8keuktabhiylqq+KST NiPq3SScYvfd1qehES2yE1dNOAWhu5rwxLydEmSfBHPcOTk0COq+Gw08O6Lu848Is7mUSrtmdOm/9 oG/KHOCfZppu00cpdMj4alsoVIq8Q3vp/0kB3SzyYj80IYPizDJZNIgvXk5mua8vDm6lGEcnjMdzp eYAAGySou0MSNgzM0Sf6isjchoBdGGJfX5+DoxJBmvDnROTC4tU3iqRih/6YyUsA==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1romU8-0000000Dv5M-1Ce1; Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:43:40 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] wifi: cfg80211/mac80211: Add support to rx retry stats From: Johannes Berg To: Hari Chandrakanthan , ath11k@lists.infradead.org Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:43:39 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20240319134522.4021062-2-quic_haric@quicinc.com> References: <20240319134522.4021062-1-quic_haric@quicinc.com> <20240319134522.4021062-2-quic_haric@quicinc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.50.4 (3.50.4-1.fc39) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Tue, 2024-03-19 at 19:15 +0530, Hari Chandrakanthan wrote: > Add support to count station level rx retries. Should the subject say "for ... stats"? > +++ b/net/mac80211/sta_info.c > @@ -2653,6 +2653,11 @@ void sta_set_sinfo(struct sta_info *sta, struct st= ation_info *sinfo, > sinfo->filled |=3D BIT_ULL(NL80211_STA_INFO_TX_RETRIES); > } > =20 > + if (!(sinfo->filled & BIT_ULL(NL80211_STA_INFO_RX_RETRIES))) { > + sinfo->rx_retries =3D sta->deflink.rx_stats.rx_retries; > + sinfo->filled |=3D BIT_ULL(NL80211_STA_INFO_RX_RETRIES); > + } The use of deflink here seems ... questionable? I know we've not really done any stats properly here for link STA (patches welcome), but I guess this could be a first one that at least sums up all the links like all of these should, and then find a way to expose per-link as well? Although possibly we should just expose per-link to cfg80211, and then have cfg80211 sum up for the MLD representation... Either way, seems odd to add something now that absolutely cannot work for MLO? johannes