[PATCH 08/13] wifi: cfg80211: Refactor the iface combination iteration helper function

[Karthikeyan Periyasamy]

On 3/28/2024 7:13 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-03-28 at 12:59 +0530, Karthikeyan Periyasamy wrote:
>>
>> +static int
>> +cfg80211_validate_iface_comb_limits(struct wiphy *wiphy,
>> +				    struct iface_combination_params *params,
>> +				    const struct ieee80211_iface_combination *c,
>> +				    u16 num_interfaces, u32 *all_iftypes)
>> +{
>> +	struct ieee80211_iface_limit *limits;
>> +	int ret = 0;
> 
> That initialization is useless.

sure

> 
>> +
>> +	if (num_interfaces > c->max_interfaces)
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> +	if (params->num_different_channels > c->num_different_channels)
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> +	limits = kmemdup(c->limits, sizeof(limits[0]) * c->n_limits,
>> +			 GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!limits)
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> +	ret = cfg80211_validate_iface_limits(wiphy,
>> +					     params->iftype_num,
>> +					     limits,
>> +					     c->n_limits,
>> +					     all_iftypes);
>> +
>> +	kfree(limits);
>> +
>> +	return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static u16 cfg80211_get_iftype_info(struct wiphy *wiphy,
>> +				    const int iftype_num[NUM_NL80211_IFTYPES],
>> +				    u32 *used_iftypes)
>> +{
>> +	enum nl80211_iftype iftype;
>> +	u16 num_interfaces = 0;
>> +
> 
> This should probably set *used_iftypes = 0.

sure

> 
>> +	for (iftype = 0; iftype < NUM_NL80211_IFTYPES; iftype++) {
>> +		num_interfaces += iftype_num[iftype];
>> +		if (iftype_num[iftype] > 0 &&
>> +		    !cfg80211_iftype_allowed(wiphy, iftype, 0, 1))
>> +			*used_iftypes |= BIT(iftype);
> 
> and that could really use a rewrite like
> 
> 		if (!iftype_num[iftype])
> 			continue;
> 
> 		num_interfaces += ...
> 
> 		if (!allowed...)
> 			*used_iftypes |= ...;
> 
> I'd say.
> 
>>   	for (i = 0; i < wiphy->n_iface_combinations; i++) {
>>   		const struct ieee80211_iface_combination *c;
>> -		struct ieee80211_iface_limit *limits;
>>   		u32 all_iftypes = 0;
>>   
>>   		c = &wiphy->iface_combinations[i];
>>   
>> -		if (num_interfaces > c->max_interfaces)
>> -			continue;
>> -		if (params->num_different_channels > c->num_different_channels)
>> +		ret = cfg80211_validate_iface_comb_limits(wiphy, params,
>> +							  c, num_interfaces,
>> +							  &all_iftypes);
>> +		if (ret == -ENOMEM) {
>> +			break;
>> +		} else if (ret) {
>> +			ret = 0;
>>   			continue;
> 
> Seems that 'break' is equivalent to just 'return ret'? And that setting
> ret = 0 seems ... strange.
> 

sure, will address above comments in the next version of the patch

-- 
Karthikeyan Periyasamy
--
கார்த்திகேயன் பெரியசாமி