Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtl8xxxu: Fix the handling of TX A-MPDU aggregation

From: Kalle Valo <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2021 13:42:23 +0300

[email-masked] writes:

> From: Chris Chiu <[email-masked]>
>
> The TX A-MPDU aggregation is not handled in the driver since the
> ieee80211_start_tx_ba_session has never been started properly.
> Start and stop the TX BA session by tracking the TX aggregation
> status of each TID. Fix the ampdu_action and the tx descriptor
> accordingly with the given TID.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Chiu <[email-masked]>
> ---
>  .../net/wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/rtl8xxxu.h  |  2 ++
>  .../wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/rtl8xxxu_core.c | 33 ++++++++++++++-----
>  2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/rtl8xxxu.h b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/rtl8xxxu.h
> index d1a566cc0c9e..3f7ff84f2056 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/rtl8xxxu.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/rtl8xxxu.h
> @@ -1383,6 +1383,8 @@ struct rtl8xxxu_priv {
>  	u8 no_pape:1;
>  	u8 int_buf[USB_INTR_CONTENT_LENGTH];
>  	u8 rssi_level;
> +	bool tx_aggr_started[IEEE80211_NUM_TIDS];

Why do you use bool of arrays? That looks racy to me. Wouldn't
DECLARE_BITMAP() be safer, like tid_bitmap uses?

> +	DECLARE_BITMAP(tid_bitmap, IEEE80211_NUM_TIDS);

I would rename this to a more descriptive name, like tid_tx_operational.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches