From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f169.google.com ([209.85.192.169]:32914 "EHLO mail-pf0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752814AbdF0TuJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jun 2017 15:50:09 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f169.google.com with SMTP id e7so21534973pfk.0 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 12:50:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 12:50:05 -0700 From: Brian Norris To: Johannes Berg Cc: Kalle Valo , Ganapathi Bhat , Nishant Sarmukadam , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dmitry Torokhov , Amitkumar Karwar , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/14] mwifiex: re-register wiphy across reset Message-ID: <20170627195003.GA93674@google.com> (sfid-20170627_215036_193152_D6246E45) References: <20170525001119.64791-1-briannorris@chromium.org> <20170525001119.64791-5-briannorris@chromium.org> <87fufk2hmm.fsf@purkki.adurom.net> <20170601173954.GA138807@google.com> <87inka77md.fsf@codeaurora.org> <20170621174829.GA92340@google.com> <1498136389.2246.7.camel@sipsolutions.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1498136389.2246.7.camel@sipsolutions.net> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: (A little slow on follow-up here) On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 02:59:49PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Wed, 2017-06-21 at 10:48 -0700, Brian Norris wrote: > > > > Yes, that all sounds nice. But for my sake, can you describe better > > what's actually going on there (e.g., can you point me at which code > > does this)? > > It's much easier with mac80211, it has all the state. Basically the > reconfig is in ieee80211_reconfig() :) Wow, that's not exactly simple code; I expect it could be pretty difficult to get that right today on mwifiex. The current approach actually should be *easier* (for the kernel side) to avoid bugs, as it should be basically the same thing as 'rmmod'. Nonetheless, there are plenty of bugs. Thanks for the pointer though. > > I'm really not familiar with mac80211 (though I was aware of > > the above general behavior). But to my knowledge, mac80211 drivers > > keep a lot more state managed in the kernel, so it's a little easier > > and more natural to get the driver/FW back to "the same state" than > > it is with a full-MAC driver. > > Indeed. Brian