Re: [PATCH 3.13.1 2/9] rsi: OS dependent functions

[Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>]

On Thu, 2014-01-30 at 21:24 +0530, Jahnavi wrote:

> +rsi_common-y := rsi_core.o rsi_osd_ops.o
> +ifeq ($(CONFIG_RSI_USB), y)
> +	rsi_common-y += rsi_usb.o
> +	ccflags-y =-DUSE_USB_INTF
> +else
> +	rsi_common-y += rsi_sdio.o
> +	ccflags-y =-DUSE_SDIO_INTF
> +endif

That can't be right - in the Kconfig you declared that it's valid to
select both SDIO and USB at the same time. You can also use the syntax
you used below:

> +obj-$(CONFIG_RSI_91x) := rsi_common.o

for ccflags to clean this up. But you should get rid of the
-DUSE_XYZ_INTF anyway and use CONFIG_RSI_USB in the code.

> +static int rsi_proc_version_read(struct seq_file *seq, void *data)

/proc? really? definitely staging material from here on ...

> +/**
> + * This function is used to put the current execution in a queue
> + * and reschedules itself for execution on "timeout" or when a
> + * wakeup is generated.
> + *
> + * @param  event Pointer to the event structure.
> + * @param  timeout Timeout value in msecs.
> + * @return status: 0 on success, -1 on failure.
> + */
> +int rsi_wait_event(struct rsi_event *event, unsigned int timeout)
> +{
> +	int status = 0;
> +
> +	if (!timeout)
> +		status = wait_event_interruptible(event->event_queue,
> +				(atomic_read(&event->event_condition) == 0));
> +	else
> +		status = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(event->event_queue,
> +				(atomic_read(&event->event_condition) == 0),
> +				timeout);
> +	return status;
> +}

That's probably better inlined.

Along with the rest of the event and thread functionality - doesn't
really help readability to obscure things behind layers of "OS
abstractions"...

> +void rsi_print(int zone, unsigned char *vdata, int len)
> +{
> +	unsigned short ii;
> +
> +	if (!(zone & rsi_zone_enabled))
> +		return;
> +
> +	if (!vdata)
> +		return;
> +
> +	for (ii = 0; ii < len; ii++) {
> +		if (!(ii % 16))
> +			pr_info("\n");
> +		pr_info("%02x ", (vdata[ii]));
> +	}
> +	pr_info("\n");
> +}

Yeah, umm, see above.

> +	unsigned int bbp_lmac_clk_reg_val:16;

16 bit bitfields? Is there anything wrong with u16 (aka unsigned short)
on your compiler version?

johannes