From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from sabertooth01.qualcomm.com ([65.197.215.72]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1VP7M4-0007U7-H0 for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:55:25 +0000 From: Kalle Valo Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/13] ath10k: introduce dynamic WMI structures References: <1380101891-18312-1-git-send-email-bartosz.markowski@tieto.com> <1380101891-18312-2-git-send-email-bartosz.markowski@tieto.com> Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 11:54:52 +0300 In-Reply-To: <1380101891-18312-2-git-send-email-bartosz.markowski@tieto.com> (Bartosz Markowski's message of "Wed, 25 Sep 2013 11:37:59 +0200") Message-ID: <87ob7grmhv.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: Bartosz Markowski Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath10k@lists.infradead.org Bartosz Markowski writes: > This is the initial framework to implement dynamic > WMI API in order to support new firmware (from so > called 10.X branch) > > The realization is to have a static WMI cmd map for > each of the firmwares, registered upom wmi init. > > This patch creates such map for MAIN FW, updates > wmi_cmd_send() calls to take as a parameter > the map value instead of direct WMI enum. > > As soon as complete 10.X API will be on place, > we will introduce the FW IE mechanics to dynamicaly > identify which FW is being used and based on that > we will use correct map, API, structures, etc. > > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Markowski > --- [...] > @@ -1293,7 +1438,8 @@ int ath10k_wmi_pdev_resume_target(struct ath10k *ar) > if (skb == NULL) > return -ENOMEM; > > - return ath10k_wmi_cmd_send(ar, skb, WMI_PDEV_RESUME_CMDID); > + return ath10k_wmi_cmd_send(ar, skb, > + ar->wmi.cmd->wmi_pdev_resume_cmdid); > } I was thinking of adding a macro WMI_PDEV_RESUME_CMDID(ar) for all dynamic wmi ids, that way it would look as closely as possible with the original code. But I'm not sure if that makes sense anymore. Thoughts? -- Kalle Valo _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k