[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFEp6-06ATV_rh_KWvjgNoiw67WPvAE-gF_gU-DJdcycDiYVqA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2025 16:06:29 +0200
From: Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@....qualcomm.com>
To: Daniele Palmas <dnlplm@...il.com>
Cc: Sergey Ryazanov <ryazanov.s.a@...il.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@....com>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/1] net: wwan: mhi_wwan_mbim: use correct mux_id for multiplexing
Hi Daniele,
On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 3:19 PM Daniele Palmas <dnlplm@...il.com> wrote:
>
> When creating a multiplexed netdevice for modems requiring the WDS
> custom mux_id value, the mux_id improperly starts from 1, while it
> should start from WDS_BIND_MUX_DATA_PORT_MUX_ID + 1.
>
> Fix this by moving the session_id assignment logic to mhi_mbim_newlink.
Currently, the MBIM session ID is identical to the WWAN ID. This
change introduces a divergence by applying an offset to the WWAN ID
for certain devices.
Whether this is acceptable likely depends on how the MBIM control path
handles session addressing. For example, if mbimcli refers to
SessionID 1, does that actually control the data session with WWAN ID
113?
Regards,
Loic
Powered by blists - more mailing lists