Re: [RFC PATCH] scan: retry scan based on scan done events per wiphy, not wdev

["Alvin Šipraga" <ALSI@bang-olufsen.dk>]

Hi Denis,

On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 11:49:02AM -0600, Denis Kenzior wrote:
> Hi Alvin,
> 
> On 11/17/22 11:29, Alvin Šipraga wrote:
> > From: Alvin Šipraga <alsi@bang-olufsen.dk>
> > 
> > ---
> >   src/scan.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >   1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/src/scan.c b/src/scan.c
> > index 5548914a12de..c3763ee41173 100644
> > --- a/src/scan.c
> > +++ b/src/scan.c
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > @@ -231,6 +247,7 @@ static void scan_request_triggered(struct l_genl_msg *msg, void *userdata)
> >   	if (err < 0) {
> >   		/* Scan in progress, assume another scan is running */
> >   		if (err == -EBUSY) {
> > +			l_debug("XXX busy");
> 
> This might need a nicer message

Sure, it was just an RFC patch. I'll send a proper patch w/ commit
message later :)

> 
> >   			sc->state = SCAN_STATE_PASSIVE;
> >   			return;
> >   		}
> > @@ -2044,6 +2061,29 @@ static void scan_parse_result_frequencies(struct l_genl_msg *msg,
> >   	}
> >   }
> > +static void scan_retry_pending(uint32_t wiphy_id)
> > +{
> > +	struct scan_context *sc = l_queue_find(scan_contexts,
> > +					       scan_context_match_retry,
> > +					       &wiphy_id);
> > +	struct scan_request *sr;
> > +
> > +	l_debug("");
> > +
> > +	if (!sc)
> > +		return;
> > +
> > +	sr = l_queue_peek_head(sc->requests);
> > +
> > +	if (L_WARN_ON(!sr))
> > +		return;
> 
> Also you could simplify out the need for this L_WARN_ON by using
> l_queue_get_entries() style for loop on the scan_context(s) instead of using
> l_queue_find.  But that's just me nitpicking.

Alright, I'll try and improve it before sending again.

> 
> > +
> > +	l_debug("XXX retry pending request");
> > +
> > +	sc->state = SCAN_STATE_NOT_RUNNING;
> > +	start_next_scan_request(&sr->work);
> > +}
> > +
> 
> Otherwise this looks fine to me.  Does it work?

Yes!

Thanks for the quick review!

Kind regards,
Alvin