[PATCH ath-next v2 0/2] wifi: ath12k: remove duplicated STA state from link peers

[Aishwarya R]

On 10/10/2026 5:17 AM, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> On 9/24/2026 10:10 PM, Aishwarya R wrote:
>> ath12k_dp_link_peer currently carries state that is not inherently
>> link-specific. Both the station pointer and authorization state are
>> shared across the links belonging to the same logical peer or station,
>> yet are stored separately in each link peer.
>>
>> This series moves ownership of these fields to structures matching their
>> actual scope:
>>
>>    * Store the station pointer only in ath12k_dp_peer.
>>    * Store authorization state only in ath12k_sta.
>>
>> Doing so eliminates duplicated state, reduces bookkeeping required when
>> the state changes, and makes the ownership model clearer.
>>
>> Patch 1 removes the duplicate sta pointer from ath12k_dp_link_peer and
>> updates users to retrieve it through ath12k_dp_peer.
>>
>> Patch 2 moves is_authorized from ath12k_dp_link_peer to ath12k_sta and
>> updates authorization handling accordingly.
>>
>> ---
>> Changes in v2:
>> - Rebased the changes
> 
> In my v1 comment I said:
> If the conflict resolution is trivial make sure to carry forward the
> Reviewed-by tags.
> 
> You did not carry those forward, and did not indicate here why you didn't
> carry them forward.
> 
> Please review:
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#using-reported-by-tested-by-reviewed-by-suggested-by-and-fixes
> 
> In particular:
> Both Tested-by and Reviewed-by tags, once received on mailing list from tester
> or reviewer, should be added by author to the applicable patches when sending
> next versions. However if the patch has changed substantially in following
> version, these tags might not be applicable anymore and thus should be
> removed. Usually removal of someone’s Acked-by, Tested-by or Reviewed-by tags
> should be mentioned in the patch changelog with an explanation (after the
> ‘---’ separator).
> 
> If the v1 Reviewed-by tags are still applicable, you can reply to the cover
> letter and add them in the reply -- my tooling will then pick them up.
> 
> Otherwise reach out to the original reviewers and have them re-review the
> changes.
> 
> /jeff

Thanks for pointing this out.

The v2 changes were limited to conflict resolution and did not affect 
the reviewed code. I've now replied to the cover letter with the 
Reviewed-by tags from v1 so they can be carried forward.