On 5/21/2025 10:33 PM, Roopni Devanathan wrote:
> Add support to get the radio for which RTS threshold needs to be changed
> from userspace. Pass on this radio index to underlying drivers as an
> additional argument.
>
> A value of -1 indicates radio index is not mentioned and that the
> configuration applies to all radio(s) of the wiphy.
>
> Signed-off-by: Roopni Devanathan <quic_rdevanat@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ar5523/ar5523.c | 3 ++-
> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c | 5 ++--
> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/mac.c | 4 +++-
> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath12k/mac.c | 4 +++-
> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc_drv_main.c | 3 ++-
> drivers/net/wireless/ath/wcn36xx/main.c | 3 ++-
> .../net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mld/mac80211.c | 3 ++-
> .../net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/mac80211.c | 3 ++-
> drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/mvm.h | 3 ++-
> drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwl8k.c | 3 ++-
> .../net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt7615/main.c | 3 ++-
> drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt76x02.h | 2 +-
> .../net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt76x02_util.c | 2 +-
> .../net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt7915/main.c | 3 ++-
> .../net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt7921/main.c | 3 ++-
> .../net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt7925/main.c | 3 ++-
> .../net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt7996/main.c | 3 ++-
> drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt7601u/main.c | 3 ++-
> drivers/net/wireless/purelifi/plfxlc/mac.c | 3 ++-
> .../net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c | 2 +-
> .../net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2800lib.h | 2 +-
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/core.c | 3 ++-
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c | 3 ++-
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/mac80211.c | 3 ++-
> drivers/net/wireless/rsi/rsi_91x_mac80211.c | 2 ++
> drivers/net/wireless/silabs/wfx/sta.c | 2 +-
> drivers/net/wireless/silabs/wfx/sta.h | 2 +-
> drivers/net/wireless/st/cw1200/sta.c | 2 +-
> drivers/net/wireless/st/cw1200/sta.h | 2 +-
> drivers/net/wireless/ti/wl1251/main.c | 3 ++-
> drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/main.c | 3 ++-
> drivers/net/wireless/virtual/mac80211_hwsim.c | 4 +++-
...
> diff --git a/include/net/mac80211.h b/include/net/mac80211.h
> index 82617579d910..553bcfebe8cc 100644
> --- a/include/net/mac80211.h
> +++ b/include/net/mac80211.h
> @@ -4572,7 +4572,8 @@ struct ieee80211_ops {
> struct ieee80211_key_conf *key,
> struct ieee80211_key_seq *seq);
> int (*set_frag_threshold)(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, u32 value);
> - int (*set_rts_threshold)(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, u32 value);
> + int (*set_rts_threshold)(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, int radio_id,
> + u32 value);
> int (*sta_add)(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct ieee80211_vif *vif,
> struct ieee80211_sta *sta);
> int (*sta_remove)(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct ieee80211_vif *vif,
rather than have one patch that modifies the get_rts_threshold API, another
that modifies the set_rts_threshold API, and future ones that will modify
others, should we put these interface changes that affect all drivers in a
single patch so that the individual driver maintainers only have to deal with
this disruption once rather than for each attribute?
that means enumerating all the attributes we want to maintain on a per-radio
basis up front. do we have that list?
/jeff
