All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Tamizh chelvam <tamizhchelvam@codeaurora.org>
Cc: c_traja@qti.qualcomm.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	ath10k@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] cfg80211: Add new NL80211_CMD_SET_BTCOEX_PRIORITY to support BTCOEX
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 17:09:11 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1481645351.20412.34.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5e5e8971c96293a81e7cb37bcdfbd593@codeaurora.org>


> > >  /**
> > > + * wiphy_btcoex_support_flags
> > > + *	This enum has the driver supported frame types for
> > > BTCOEX.
> > > + * @WIPHY_WLAN_BE_PREFERRED - Supports Best Effort frame for
> > > BTCOEX
> > > + * @WIPHY_WLAN_BK_PREFERRED - supports Background frame for
> > > BTCOEX
> > > + * @WIPHY_WLAN_VI_PREFERRED - supports Video frame for BTCOEX
> > > + * @WIPHY_WLAN_VO_PREFERRED - supports Voice frame for BTCOEX
> > > + * @WIPHY_WLAN_BEACON_PREFERRED - supports Beacon frame for
> > > BTCOEX
> > > + * @WIPHY_WLAN_MGMT_PREFERRED - supports Management frames for
> > > BTCOEX.
> > > + */
> > 
> > That's not making much sense to me?
> > 
> 
> is it fine to have as WIPHY_BTCOEX_BE_PREFERRED ?

It's not really clear to me what you intend to do this - if it's really
support flags then you really should name those better.

> > > +/**
> > > + * enum wiphy_btcoex_priority - BTCOEX priority level
> > > + *	This enum defines priority level for BTCOEX
> > > + * WIPHY_WLAN_PREFERRED_LOW - low priority frames over BT
> > > traffic
> > > + * WIPHY_WLAN_PREFERRED_HIGH - high priority frames over BT
> > > traffic
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +enum wiphy_btcoex_priority {
> > > +	WIPHY_WLAN_PREFERRED_LOW = false,
> > > +	WIPHY_WLAN_PREFERRED_HIGH = true,
> > > +};
> > 
> > That false/true seems just strange.
> > 
> 
> I will just use as a enum without assigning false/true.

What do you even need this enum for though?

> > > +enum nl80211_btcoex_priority {
> > > +	__NL80211_WLAN_PREFERRED_INVALID,
> > > +	NL80211_WLAN_BE_PREFERRED,
> > > +	NL80211_WLAN_BK_PREFERRED,
> > > +	NL80211_WLAN_VI_PREFERRED,
> > > +	NL80211_WLAN_VO_PREFERRED,
> > > +	NL80211_WLAN_BEACON_PREFERRED,
> > > +	NL80211_WLAN_MGMT_PREFERRED,
> > > +	__NL80211_WLAN_PREFERRED_LAST,
> > > +	NL80211_WLAN_PREFERRED_MAX =
> > > +			__NL80211_WLAN_PREFERRED_LAST - 1,
> > > +};
> > 
> > Wouldn't a bitmap be easier?
> > 
> since this is to distinguish between different btcoex priorities and
> we 
> are not going to do any manipulations on these parameters.
> It is just used as flag attribute.

But why the (parsing) complexity, when a single bitmap would do?

johannes

_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Tamizh chelvam <tamizhchelvam@codeaurora.org>
Cc: c_traja@qti.qualcomm.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	ath10k@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] cfg80211: Add new NL80211_CMD_SET_BTCOEX_PRIORITY to support BTCOEX
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 17:09:11 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1481645351.20412.34.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5e5e8971c96293a81e7cb37bcdfbd593@codeaurora.org>


> > >  /**
> > > + * wiphy_btcoex_support_flags
> > > + *	This enum has the driver supported frame types for
> > > BTCOEX.
> > > + * @WIPHY_WLAN_BE_PREFERRED - Supports Best Effort frame for
> > > BTCOEX
> > > + * @WIPHY_WLAN_BK_PREFERRED - supports Background frame for
> > > BTCOEX
> > > + * @WIPHY_WLAN_VI_PREFERRED - supports Video frame for BTCOEX
> > > + * @WIPHY_WLAN_VO_PREFERRED - supports Voice frame for BTCOEX
> > > + * @WIPHY_WLAN_BEACON_PREFERRED - supports Beacon frame for
> > > BTCOEX
> > > + * @WIPHY_WLAN_MGMT_PREFERRED - supports Management frames for
> > > BTCOEX.
> > > + */
> > 
> > That's not making much sense to me?
> > 
> 
> is it fine to have as WIPHY_BTCOEX_BE_PREFERRED ?

It's not really clear to me what you intend to do this - if it's really
support flags then you really should name those better.

> > > +/**
> > > + * enum wiphy_btcoex_priority - BTCOEX priority level
> > > + *	This enum defines priority level for BTCOEX
> > > + * WIPHY_WLAN_PREFERRED_LOW - low priority frames over BT
> > > traffic
> > > + * WIPHY_WLAN_PREFERRED_HIGH - high priority frames over BT
> > > traffic
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +enum wiphy_btcoex_priority {
> > > +	WIPHY_WLAN_PREFERRED_LOW = false,
> > > +	WIPHY_WLAN_PREFERRED_HIGH = true,
> > > +};
> > 
> > That false/true seems just strange.
> > 
> 
> I will just use as a enum without assigning false/true.

What do you even need this enum for though?

> > > +enum nl80211_btcoex_priority {
> > > +	__NL80211_WLAN_PREFERRED_INVALID,
> > > +	NL80211_WLAN_BE_PREFERRED,
> > > +	NL80211_WLAN_BK_PREFERRED,
> > > +	NL80211_WLAN_VI_PREFERRED,
> > > +	NL80211_WLAN_VO_PREFERRED,
> > > +	NL80211_WLAN_BEACON_PREFERRED,
> > > +	NL80211_WLAN_MGMT_PREFERRED,
> > > +	__NL80211_WLAN_PREFERRED_LAST,
> > > +	NL80211_WLAN_PREFERRED_MAX =
> > > +			__NL80211_WLAN_PREFERRED_LAST - 1,
> > > +};
> > 
> > Wouldn't a bitmap be easier?
> > 
> since this is to distinguish between different btcoex priorities and
> we 
> are not going to do any manipulations on these parameters.
> It is just used as flag attribute.

But why the (parsing) complexity, when a single bitmap would do?

johannes

  reply	other threads:[~2016-12-13 16:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-08 13:15 [PATCH 0/4] cfg80211: mac80211: BTCOEX feature support c_traja
2016-11-08 13:15 ` c_traja
2016-11-08 13:15 ` [PATCH 1/4] cfg80211: Add support to enable or disable btcoex c_traja
2016-11-08 13:15   ` c_traja
2016-12-05 14:46   ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-05 14:46     ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-07 11:04     ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-12-07 11:04       ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-11-08 13:15 ` [PATCH 2/4] cfg80211: Add new NL80211_CMD_SET_BTCOEX_PRIORITY to support BTCOEX c_traja
2016-11-08 13:15   ` c_traja
2016-12-05 14:49   ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-05 14:49     ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-07 17:59     ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-12-07 17:59       ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-12-13 16:09       ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2016-12-13 16:09         ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-16  5:53         ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-12-16  5:53           ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-12-16  9:37           ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-16  9:37             ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-19  8:11             ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-12-19  8:11               ` Tamizh chelvam
2017-01-02 10:48               ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-02 10:48                 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-05 13:18                 ` Tamizh chelvam
2017-01-05 13:18                   ` Tamizh chelvam
2017-01-05 13:38                   ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-05 13:38                     ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-09 10:10                     ` Tamizh chelvam
2017-01-09 10:10                       ` Tamizh chelvam
2017-01-09 10:36                       ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-09 10:36                         ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-19 13:52                         ` Tamizh chelvam
2017-01-19 13:52                           ` Tamizh chelvam
2016-11-08 13:15 ` [PATCH 3/4] mac80211: Add support to enable or disable btcoex c_traja
2016-11-08 13:15   ` c_traja
2016-11-08 13:15 ` [PATCH 4/4] mac80211: Add support to update btcoex priority value c_traja
2016-11-08 13:15   ` c_traja

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1481645351.20412.34.camel@sipsolutions.net \
    --to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=c_traja@qti.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tamizhchelvam@codeaurora.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.