> On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 03:59:17PM +0100, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 03:03:14PM +0100, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > > > Introduce reset and reset_complete wlan callback to schedule WLAN driver > > > > reset when ethernet/wed driver is resetting. > > > > > > > > Tested-by: Daniel Golle > > > > Co-developed-by: Sujuan Chen > > > > Signed-off-by: Sujuan Chen > > > > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Bianconi > > > > --- > > > > drivers/net/ethernet/mediatek/mtk_eth_soc.c | 6 ++++ > > > > drivers/net/ethernet/mediatek/mtk_wed.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > drivers/net/ethernet/mediatek/mtk_wed.h | 8 +++++ > > > > include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk_wed.h | 2 ++ > > > > 4 files changed, 56 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mediatek/mtk_eth_soc.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mediatek/mtk_eth_soc.c > > > > index bafae4f0312e..2d74e26f45c9 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mediatek/mtk_eth_soc.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mediatek/mtk_eth_soc.c > > > > @@ -3913,6 +3913,10 @@ static void mtk_pending_work(struct work_struct *work) > > > > mtk_w32(eth, val, MTK_MAC_MCR(i)); > > > > } > > > > > > > > + rtnl_unlock(); > > > > + mtk_wed_fe_reset(); > > > > + rtnl_lock(); > > > > > > Is it safe to call rtnl_unlock(), perform some work and lock again? > > > > Yes, mtk_pending_work sets MTK_RESETTING bit and a new reset work is not > > scheduled until this bit is cleared > > I'm more worried about opening a window for user-space access while you > are performing FW reset. looking at mtk_pending_work() I guess running mtk_wed_fe_reset() releasing RTNL lock is not harmful since we just perform few actions (ppe reset, ...) before running mtk_wed_fe_reset(). Moreover, the core reset part in mtk_pending_work() (mtk_stop(), mtk_open(), ..) is done after mtk_wed_fe_reset() where we reacquired RTNL lock. In order to avoid any possible race, I guess we can just re-do the preliminary reset configuration done before mtk_wed_fe_reset() just after re-acquiring RTNL lock. Regards, Lorenzo > > <...> > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk_wed.h b/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk_wed.h > > > > index db637a13888d..ddff54fc9717 100644 > > > > --- a/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk_wed.h > > > > +++ b/include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk_wed.h > > > > @@ -150,6 +150,8 @@ struct mtk_wed_device { > > > > void (*release_rx_buf)(struct mtk_wed_device *wed); > > > > void (*update_wo_rx_stats)(struct mtk_wed_device *wed, > > > > struct mtk_wed_wo_rx_stats *stats); > > > > + int (*reset)(struct mtk_wed_device *wed); > > > > + int (*reset_complete)(struct mtk_wed_device *wed); > > > > > > I don't see any driver implementation of these callbacks in this series. > > > Did I miss it? > > > > These callbacks are implemented in the mt76 driver. I have not added these > > patches to the series since mt76 patches usually go through Felix/Kalle's > > trees (anyway I am fine to add them to the series if they can go into net-next > > directly). > > Usually patches that use specific functionality are submitted together > with API changes. > > > > > Regards, > > Lorenzo > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > } wlan; > > > > #endif > > > > }; > > > > -- > > > > 2.39.0 > > > > > >