[DESIGN RFC] Critical Update handling in the kernel

Nicolas Escande nico.escande at gmail.com
Mon Sep 29 05:19:03 PDT 2025


On Thu Sep 4, 2025 at 4:24 PM CEST, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> On 7/24/2025 1:48 AM, Ping-Ke Shih wrote:
>> Johannes Berg <johannes at sipsolutions.net> wrote:
>>>> Before we move forward with implementation, we'd like to confirm whether
>>>> the proposed design looks sound. Are there any concerns or potential issues
>>>> we should be aware of?
>>>>
>>>> Out of curiosity, we're also interested in understanding how other vendors
>>>> are currently handling this feature in their downstream drivers. Is it
>>>> typically offloaded to firmware, or is the logic implemented in the kernel?
>>>> Just want to confirm whether all this will be used only by mac80211_hwsim
>>>> or will there be any actual users?
>>>
>>> I think Ping-Ke previously indicated that they were planning to do
>>> things host side? I'm not super familiar with the timing constraints
>>> though, so I'm not sure what that might imply.
>> 
>> Yes, Realtek vendor driver handles the feature in host driver. Having not
>> tested CSA and ML procedure mentioned in this discussion thread, we
>> are also not sure how timing constraint to evaluate if we have to implement
>> the feature in firmware.  
>
> Ping-Ke (and Johannes),
> Have you had a chance to review Aditya's August 21 follow-up?
>
> We'd like to move forward with our firmware-based approach (since that logic
> is already shipping in our OpenWrt-based systems). Perhaps Realtek can propose
> alternative host-based logic, and there can be a flag to select either
> host-based or firmware-based Critical Update handling?
>
> Thanks,
> /jeff

Hey guys, any news on this one ? Seeing the ieee802.11 bn preliminary work done
by Johannes, reminded me that there are still some usefull parts of 802.11 be
that are not completely finished yet ...

Thanks,



More information about the ath12k mailing list