| Message ID | 20191022100420.25116-5-yhchuang@realtek.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | f39e9bd49a3d612a2489b774265107f61ffd82fa |
| Delegated to: | Kalle Valo |
| Headers | show |
| Series | rtw88: minor throughput improvement | expand |
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 6:04 PM <yhchuang@realtek.com> wrote: > > From: Tzu-En Huang <tehuang@realtek.com> > > Support setting bit rate from upper layer. > After configuring the original rate control result in the driver, the > result is then masked by the bit rate mask received from the ops > set_bitrate_mask. Lastly, the masked result will be sent to firmware. > > Signed-off-by: Tzu-En Huang <tehuang@realtek.com> > Signed-off-by: Yan-Hsuan Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com> > --- > > v1 -> v2 > * No change > > v2 -> v3 > * use u64_encode_bits > > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c | 53 +++++++++++++ > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c | 78 +++++++++++++++---- > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.h | 3 + > 3 files changed, 118 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c > index bc04cc280a96..2247bd61e716 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c > @@ -684,6 +686,56 @@ static void rtw_ops_flush(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, > mutex_unlock(&rtwdev->mutex); > } > > +struct rtw_iter_bitrate_mask_data { > + struct rtw_dev *rtwdev; > + struct ieee80211_vif *vif; > + const struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask *mask; > +}; > + > +static void rtw_ra_mask_info_update_iter(void *data, struct ieee80211_sta *sta) > +{ > + struct rtw_iter_bitrate_mask_data *br_data = data; > + struct rtw_sta_info *si = (struct rtw_sta_info *)sta->drv_priv; > + > + if (si->vif != br_data->vif) > + return; > + > + /* free previous mask setting */ > + kfree(si->mask); You may want to do NULL check for si->mask before kfree. > + si->mask = kmemdup(br_data->mask, sizeof(struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask), > + GFP_ATOMIC); > + if (!si->mask) { > + si->use_cfg_mask = false; > + return; > + } > + > + si->use_cfg_mask = true; > + rtw_update_sta_info(br_data->rtwdev, si); > +} > + > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c > index 47e74f0aec06..e53143132a9b 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c > @@ -612,12 +612,71 @@ static u8 get_rate_id(u8 wireless_set, enum rtw_bandwidth bw_mode, u8 tx_num) > #define RA_MASK_OFDM_IN_HT_2G 0x00010 > #define RA_MASK_OFDM_IN_HT_5G 0x00030 > > +static u64 rtw_update_rate_mask(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev, > + struct rtw_sta_info *si, > + u64 ra_mask, bool is_vht_enable, > + u8 wireless_set) > +{ > + struct rtw_hal *hal = &rtwdev->hal; > + const struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask *mask = si->mask; > + u64 cfg_mask = GENMASK(63, 0); > + u8 rssi_level, band; > + > + if (wireless_set != WIRELESS_CCK) { > + rssi_level = si->rssi_level; > + if (rssi_level == 0) > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffffffULL; > + else if (rssi_level == 1) > + ra_mask &= 0xfffffffffffffff0ULL; > + else if (rssi_level == 2) > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffefe0ULL; > + else if (rssi_level == 3) > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffcfc0ULL; > + else if (rssi_level == 4) > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffff8f80ULL; > + else if (rssi_level >= 5) > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffff0f00ULL; > + } Would be better to enumerate rssi_level instead of 0 to 5. Does level 0 means bad rssi or good? > -- > 2.17.1 >
> -----Original Message----- > From: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf > Of Chris Chiu > Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2019 8:49 PM > To: Tony Chuang > Cc: Kalle Valo; linux-wireless; Brian Norris > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] rtw88: add set_bitrate_mask support > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 6:04 PM <yhchuang@realtek.com> wrote: > > > > From: Tzu-En Huang <tehuang@realtek.com> > > > > Support setting bit rate from upper layer. > > After configuring the original rate control result in the driver, the > > result is then masked by the bit rate mask received from the ops > > set_bitrate_mask. Lastly, the masked result will be sent to firmware. > > > > Signed-off-by: Tzu-En Huang <tehuang@realtek.com> > > Signed-off-by: Yan-Hsuan Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com> > > --- > > > > v1 -> v2 > > * No change > > > > v2 -> v3 > > * use u64_encode_bits > > > > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c | 53 +++++++++++++ > > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c | 78 +++++++++++++++---- > > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.h | 3 + > > 3 files changed, 118 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c > b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c > > index bc04cc280a96..2247bd61e716 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c > > @@ -684,6 +686,56 @@ static void rtw_ops_flush(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, > > mutex_unlock(&rtwdev->mutex); > > } > > > > +struct rtw_iter_bitrate_mask_data { > > + struct rtw_dev *rtwdev; > > + struct ieee80211_vif *vif; > > + const struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask *mask; > > +}; > > + > > +static void rtw_ra_mask_info_update_iter(void *data, struct ieee80211_sta *sta) > > +{ > > + struct rtw_iter_bitrate_mask_data *br_data = data; > > + struct rtw_sta_info *si = (struct rtw_sta_info *)sta->drv_priv; > > + > > + if (si->vif != br_data->vif) > > + return; > > + > > + /* free previous mask setting */ > > + kfree(si->mask); > > You may want to do NULL check for si->mask before kfree. kfree checks NULL by itself, and checkpatch also warns this kind of needless checking. > > > + si->mask = kmemdup(br_data->mask, sizeof(struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask), > > + GFP_ATOMIC); > > + if (!si->mask) { > > + si->use_cfg_mask = false; > > + return; > > + } > > + > > + si->use_cfg_mask = true; > > + rtw_update_sta_info(br_data->rtwdev, si); > > +} > > + > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c > > index 47e74f0aec06..e53143132a9b 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c > > @@ -612,12 +612,71 @@ static u8 get_rate_id(u8 wireless_set, enum rtw_bandwidth bw_mode, u8 tx_num) > > #define RA_MASK_OFDM_IN_HT_2G 0x00010 > > #define RA_MASK_OFDM_IN_HT_5G 0x00030 > > > > +static u64 rtw_update_rate_mask(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev, > > + struct rtw_sta_info *si, > > + u64 ra_mask, bool is_vht_enable, > > + u8 wireless_set) > > +{ > > + struct rtw_hal *hal = &rtwdev->hal; > > + const struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask *mask = si->mask; > > + u64 cfg_mask = GENMASK(63, 0); > > + u8 rssi_level, band; > > + > > + if (wireless_set != WIRELESS_CCK) { > > + rssi_level = si->rssi_level; > > + if (rssi_level == 0) > > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffffffULL; > > + else if (rssi_level == 1) > > + ra_mask &= 0xfffffffffffffff0ULL; > > + else if (rssi_level == 2) > > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffefe0ULL; > > + else if (rssi_level == 3) > > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffcfc0ULL; > > + else if (rssi_level == 4) > > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffff8f80ULL; > > + else if (rssi_level >= 5) > > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffff0f00ULL; > > + } > > Would be better to enumerate rssi_level instead of 0 to 5. Does level > 0 means bad rssi or good? > > > -- > > 2.17.1 > > > > ------Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
> [mailto:linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf > > Of Chris Chiu > > Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2019 8:49 PM > > To: Tony Chuang > > Cc: Kalle Valo; linux-wireless; Brian Norris > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] rtw88: add set_bitrate_mask support > > > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 6:04 PM <yhchuang@realtek.com> wrote: > > > > > > From: Tzu-En Huang <tehuang@realtek.com> > > > > > > Support setting bit rate from upper layer. > > > After configuring the original rate control result in the driver, the > > > result is then masked by the bit rate mask received from the ops > > > set_bitrate_mask. Lastly, the masked result will be sent to firmware. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Tzu-En Huang <tehuang@realtek.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Yan-Hsuan Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com> > > > --- > > > > > > v1 -> v2 > > > * No change > > > > > > v2 -> v3 > > > * use u64_encode_bits > > > > > > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c | 53 +++++++++++++ > > > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c | 78 > +++++++++++++++---- > > > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.h | 3 + > > > 3 files changed, 118 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c > > b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c > > > index bc04cc280a96..2247bd61e716 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c > > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c > > > @@ -684,6 +686,56 @@ static void rtw_ops_flush(struct ieee80211_hw > *hw, > > > mutex_unlock(&rtwdev->mutex); > > > } > > > > > > +struct rtw_iter_bitrate_mask_data { > > > + struct rtw_dev *rtwdev; > > > + struct ieee80211_vif *vif; > > > + const struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask *mask; > > > +}; > > > + > > > +static void rtw_ra_mask_info_update_iter(void *data, struct > ieee80211_sta *sta) > > > +{ > > > + struct rtw_iter_bitrate_mask_data *br_data = data; > > > + struct rtw_sta_info *si = (struct rtw_sta_info *)sta->drv_priv; > > > + > > > + if (si->vif != br_data->vif) > > > + return; > > > + > > > + /* free previous mask setting */ > > > + kfree(si->mask); > > > > You may want to do NULL check for si->mask before kfree. > > kfree checks NULL by itself, and checkpatch also warns this kind of needless > checking. > > > > > > + si->mask = kmemdup(br_data->mask, sizeof(struct > cfg80211_bitrate_mask), > > > + GFP_ATOMIC); > > > + if (!si->mask) { > > > + si->use_cfg_mask = false; > > > + return; > > > + } > > > + > > > + si->use_cfg_mask = true; > > > + rtw_update_sta_info(br_data->rtwdev, si); > > > +} > > > + > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c > b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c > > > index 47e74f0aec06..e53143132a9b 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c > > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c > > > @@ -612,12 +612,71 @@ static u8 get_rate_id(u8 wireless_set, enum > rtw_bandwidth bw_mode, u8 tx_num) > > > #define RA_MASK_OFDM_IN_HT_2G 0x00010 > > > #define RA_MASK_OFDM_IN_HT_5G 0x00030 > > > > > > +static u64 rtw_update_rate_mask(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev, > > > + struct rtw_sta_info *si, > > > + u64 ra_mask, bool is_vht_enable, > > > + u8 wireless_set) > > > +{ > > > + struct rtw_hal *hal = &rtwdev->hal; > > > + const struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask *mask = si->mask; > > > + u64 cfg_mask = GENMASK(63, 0); > > > + u8 rssi_level, band; > > > + > > > + if (wireless_set != WIRELESS_CCK) { > > > + rssi_level = si->rssi_level; > > > + if (rssi_level == 0) > > > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffffffULL; > > > + else if (rssi_level == 1) > > > + ra_mask &= 0xfffffffffffffff0ULL; > > > + else if (rssi_level == 2) > > > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffefe0ULL; > > > + else if (rssi_level == 3) > > > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffcfc0ULL; > > > + else if (rssi_level == 4) > > > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffff8f80ULL; > > > + else if (rssi_level >= 5) > > > + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffff0f00ULL; > > > + } > > > > Would be better to enumerate rssi_level instead of 0 to 5. Does level > > 0 means bad rssi or good? > > I think 0 is the lowest level. And I think we don't need to add an enum for this kind of levels, as the number just presents the meaning of it. Yan-Hsuan
Tony Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com> 於 2019年10月23日 上午10:37 寫道： >> [mailto:linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf >>> Of Chris Chiu >>> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2019 8:49 PM >>> To: Tony Chuang >>> Cc: Kalle Valo; linux-wireless; Brian Norris >>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] rtw88: add set_bitrate_mask support >>> >>>> On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 6:04 PM <yhchuang@realtek.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> From: Tzu-En Huang <tehuang@realtek.com> >>>> >>>> Support setting bit rate from upper layer. >>>> After configuring the original rate control result in the driver, the >>>> result is then masked by the bit rate mask received from the ops >>>> set_bitrate_mask. Lastly, the masked result will be sent to firmware. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Tzu-En Huang <tehuang@realtek.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Yan-Hsuan Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com> Reviewed-by: Chris Chiu <chiu@endlessm.com> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> v1 -> v2 >>>> * No change >>>> >>>> v2 -> v3 >>>> * use u64_encode_bits >>>> >>>> +static u64 rtw_update_rate_mask(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev, >>>> + struct rtw_sta_info *si, >>>> + u64 ra_mask, bool is_vht_enable, >>>> + u8 wireless_set) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct rtw_hal *hal = &rtwdev->hal; >>>> + const struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask *mask = si->mask; >>>> + u64 cfg_mask = GENMASK(63, 0); >>>> + u8 rssi_level, band; >>>> + >>>> + if (wireless_set != WIRELESS_CCK) { >>>> + rssi_level = si->rssi_level; >>>> + if (rssi_level == 0) >>>> + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffffffULL; >>>> + else if (rssi_level == 1) >>>> + ra_mask &= 0xfffffffffffffff0ULL; >>>> + else if (rssi_level == 2) >>>> + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffefe0ULL; >>>> + else if (rssi_level == 3) >>>> + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffcfc0ULL; >>>> + else if (rssi_level == 4) >>>> + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffff8f80ULL; >>>> + else if (rssi_level >= 5) >>>> + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffff0f00ULL; >>>> + } >>> >>> Would be better to enumerate rssi_level instead of 0 to 5. Does level >>> 0 means bad rssi or good? >>> > > I think 0 is the lowest level. And I think we don't need to add an enum for > this kind of levels, as the number just presents the meaning of it. > > Yan-Hsuan OK. I think it also makes sense to me. Chris
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c index bc04cc280a96..2247bd61e716 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c @@ -475,6 +475,8 @@ static int rtw_ops_sta_remove(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(sta->txq); i++) rtw_txq_cleanup(rtwdev, sta->txq[i]); + kfree(si->mask); + rtwdev->sta_cnt--; rtw_info(rtwdev, "sta %pM with macid %d left\n", @@ -684,6 +686,56 @@ static void rtw_ops_flush(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, mutex_unlock(&rtwdev->mutex); } +struct rtw_iter_bitrate_mask_data { + struct rtw_dev *rtwdev; + struct ieee80211_vif *vif; + const struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask *mask; +}; + +static void rtw_ra_mask_info_update_iter(void *data, struct ieee80211_sta *sta) +{ + struct rtw_iter_bitrate_mask_data *br_data = data; + struct rtw_sta_info *si = (struct rtw_sta_info *)sta->drv_priv; + + if (si->vif != br_data->vif) + return; + + /* free previous mask setting */ + kfree(si->mask); + si->mask = kmemdup(br_data->mask, sizeof(struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask), + GFP_ATOMIC); + if (!si->mask) { + si->use_cfg_mask = false; + return; + } + + si->use_cfg_mask = true; + rtw_update_sta_info(br_data->rtwdev, si); +} + +static void rtw_ra_mask_info_update(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev, + struct ieee80211_vif *vif, + const struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask *mask) +{ + struct rtw_iter_bitrate_mask_data br_data; + + br_data.rtwdev = rtwdev; + br_data.vif = vif; + br_data.mask = mask; + rtw_iterate_stas_atomic(rtwdev, rtw_ra_mask_info_update_iter, &br_data); +} + +static int rtw_ops_set_bitrate_mask(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, + struct ieee80211_vif *vif, + const struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask *mask) +{ + struct rtw_dev *rtwdev = hw->priv; + + rtw_ra_mask_info_update(rtwdev, vif, mask); + + return 0; +} + const struct ieee80211_ops rtw_ops = { .tx = rtw_ops_tx, .wake_tx_queue = rtw_ops_wake_tx_queue, @@ -705,5 +757,6 @@ const struct ieee80211_ops rtw_ops = { .set_rts_threshold = rtw_ops_set_rts_threshold, .sta_statistics = rtw_ops_sta_statistics, .flush = rtw_ops_flush, + .set_bitrate_mask = rtw_ops_set_bitrate_mask, }; EXPORT_SYMBOL(rtw_ops); diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c index 47e74f0aec06..e53143132a9b 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.c @@ -612,12 +612,71 @@ static u8 get_rate_id(u8 wireless_set, enum rtw_bandwidth bw_mode, u8 tx_num) #define RA_MASK_OFDM_IN_HT_2G 0x00010 #define RA_MASK_OFDM_IN_HT_5G 0x00030 +static u64 rtw_update_rate_mask(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev, + struct rtw_sta_info *si, + u64 ra_mask, bool is_vht_enable, + u8 wireless_set) +{ + struct rtw_hal *hal = &rtwdev->hal; + const struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask *mask = si->mask; + u64 cfg_mask = GENMASK(63, 0); + u8 rssi_level, band; + + if (wireless_set != WIRELESS_CCK) { + rssi_level = si->rssi_level; + if (rssi_level == 0) + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffffffULL; + else if (rssi_level == 1) + ra_mask &= 0xfffffffffffffff0ULL; + else if (rssi_level == 2) + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffefe0ULL; + else if (rssi_level == 3) + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffcfc0ULL; + else if (rssi_level == 4) + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffff8f80ULL; + else if (rssi_level >= 5) + ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffff0f00ULL; + } + + if (!si->use_cfg_mask) + return ra_mask; + + band = hal->current_band_type; + if (band == RTW_BAND_2G) { + band = NL80211_BAND_2GHZ; + cfg_mask = mask->control[band].legacy; + } else if (band == RTW_BAND_5G) { + band = NL80211_BAND_5GHZ; + cfg_mask = u64_encode_bits(mask->control[band].legacy, + RA_MASK_OFDM_RATES); + } + + if (!is_vht_enable) { + if (ra_mask & RA_MASK_HT_RATES_1SS) + cfg_mask |= u64_encode_bits(mask->control[band].ht_mcs[0], + RA_MASK_HT_RATES_1SS); + if (ra_mask & RA_MASK_HT_RATES_2SS) + cfg_mask |= u64_encode_bits(mask->control[band].ht_mcs[1], + RA_MASK_HT_RATES_2SS); + } else { + if (ra_mask & RA_MASK_VHT_RATES_1SS) + cfg_mask |= u64_encode_bits(mask->control[band].vht_mcs[0], + RA_MASK_VHT_RATES_1SS); + if (ra_mask & RA_MASK_VHT_RATES_2SS) + cfg_mask |= u64_encode_bits(mask->control[band].vht_mcs[1], + RA_MASK_VHT_RATES_2SS); + } + + ra_mask &= cfg_mask; + + return ra_mask; +} + void rtw_update_sta_info(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev, struct rtw_sta_info *si) { struct ieee80211_sta *sta = si->sta; struct rtw_efuse *efuse = &rtwdev->efuse; struct rtw_hal *hal = &rtwdev->hal; - u8 rssi_level; u8 wireless_set; u8 bw_mode; u8 rate_id; @@ -710,21 +769,8 @@ void rtw_update_sta_info(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev, struct rtw_sta_info *si) rate_id = get_rate_id(wireless_set, bw_mode, tx_num); - if (wireless_set != WIRELESS_CCK) { - rssi_level = si->rssi_level; - if (rssi_level == 0) - ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffffffULL; - else if (rssi_level == 1) - ra_mask &= 0xfffffffffffffff0ULL; - else if (rssi_level == 2) - ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffefe0ULL; - else if (rssi_level == 3) - ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffffcfc0ULL; - else if (rssi_level == 4) - ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffff8f80ULL; - else if (rssi_level >= 5) - ra_mask &= 0xffffffffffff0f00ULL; - } + ra_mask = rtw_update_rate_mask(rtwdev, si, ra_mask, is_vht_enable, + wireless_set); si->bw_mode = bw_mode; si->stbc_en = stbc_en; diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.h b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.h index 14b35152fe9f..5e33b7e47a9d 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.h +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/main.h @@ -646,6 +646,9 @@ struct rtw_sta_info { DECLARE_BITMAP(tid_ba, IEEE80211_NUM_TIDS); struct rtw_ra_report ra_report; + + bool use_cfg_mask; + struct cfg80211_bitrate_mask *mask; }; enum rtw_bfee_role {