linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH rtw-next v2 7/7] wifi: rtw89: process TX wait skbs for USB via C2H handler

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20251011175758-9e1b3340d51ac93a2663a800-pchelkin@ispras>
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2025 19:06:25 +0300
From: Fedor Pchelkin <pchelkin@...ras.ru>
To: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@...ltek.com>
Cc: Bitterblue Smith <rtl8821cerfe2@...il.com>, 
	Zong-Zhe Yang <kevin_yang@...ltek.com>, Bernie Huang <phhuang@...ltek.com>, 
	"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"lvc-project@...uxtesting.org" <lvc-project@...uxtesting.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rtw-next v2 7/7] wifi: rtw89: process TX wait skbs for
 USB via C2H handler

On Tue, 07. Oct 08:07, Ping-Ke Shih wrote:
> Fedor Pchelkin <pchelkin@...ras.ru> wrote:
> > @@ -1173,7 +1173,8 @@ int rtw89_core_tx_kick_off_and_wait(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev, struct sk_buff *sk
> > 
> >         if (time_left == 0) {
> >                 ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
> > -               list_add_tail(&wait->list, &rtwdev->tx_waits);
> > +               if (!rtwdev->hci.tx_rpt_enable)
> > +                       list_add_tail(&wait->list, &rtwdev->tx_waits);
> 
> Oh. You avoid using rtwdev->tx_waits for USB. But I'd like to have the same
> behavior as PCIE.

I may be confused but doesn't it conflict with the comment [1] you've
posted to the previous version?  I've treated that as we should use
rtwdev->tx_rpt_queue for both TX wait and IEEE80211_TX_CTL_REQ_TX_STATUS
frames...

I'm all for following the PCIe-style as possible, too, but then initial
comment [1] becomes irrelevant, right?

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/c2c40bed311c4f05948cf2541c64ea30@realtek.com/