Re: [PATCH 00/15] staging: brcm80211: cleanup fullmac structs and softmac srom lookup

["Arend van Spriel" <arend@broadcom.com>]

On 10/05/2011 04:40 PM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
> On 10/05/2011 03:19 PM, Arend van Spriel wrote:
>> This series addresses more community feedback items received on mainline
>> patch (v2) posted August 25, 2011. The driver structures in brcmfmac could
>> do with some tidying and in the brcmsmac variables loaded from srom were
>> accessed by string identifiers. This has been replaced by enumerated
>> identifiers and the entries are stored in kernel standard linked list.
>>
>> This series applies to staging-next and depends on the patch series posted
>> on Oct 4, 2011 (see Message-ID below).
>>
>> Message-ID:<1317763152-17607-1-git-send-email-arend@broadcom.com>
>>
>> Arend van Spriel (11):
>>    staging: brcm80211: move driver variable functions to srom.c
>>    staging: brcm80211: remove code duplication for driver variable
>>      lookup
>>    staging: brcm80211: change parameter in driver variable lookup
>>    staging: brcm80211: remove locking macro definitions
>>    staging: brcm80211: fix thread blocking issue in
>>      brcmf_sdbrcm_bus_stop()
>>    staging: brcm80211: remove invalid variable lookup from srom
>>    staging: brcm80211: use identifiers instead of string for srom lookup
>>    staging: brcm80211: use enum identifiers in srom variable tables
>>    staging: brcm80211: replace string based variable storage by linked
>>      list
>>    staging: brcm80211: remove parameter 'off' from _initvars_srom_pci()
>>    staging: brcm80211: cleanup driver variable references
>>
>> Franky Lin (4):
>>    staging: brcm80211: remove threads_only code from fullmac
>>    staging: brcm80211: remove redundant bus register layer from fullmac
>>    staging: brcm80211: clean up struct brcmf_if in fullmac
>>    staging: brcm80211: remove brcmf_op_if from fullmac
>>
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmfmac/bcmsdh.c       |   10 -
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmfmac/bcmsdh_sdmmc.c |   16 +-
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmfmac/dhd_linux.c    |  134 +--
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmfmac/dhd_sdio.c     |  133 +--
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmfmac/sdio_host.h    |    4 -
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/aiutils.c      |   32 +-
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/aiutils.h      |    6 +-
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/antsel.c       |   15 +-
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/channel.c      |    2 +-
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/mac80211_if.c  |  157 ++--
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/main.c         |  144 +---
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/main.h         |    5 -
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/nicpci.c       |    5 +-
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/nicpci.h       |    2 +-
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/phy/phy_cmn.c  |   42 +-
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/phy/phy_hal.h  |    4 +-
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/phy/phy_int.h  |    7 -
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/phy/phy_lcn.c  |   64 +-
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/phy/phy_n.c    |  330 ++++--
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/phy_shim.c     |    9 +
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/phy_shim.h     |    4 +
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/pub.h          |  263 +++++-
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/srom.c         | 1124 +++++++++++----------
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/srom.h         |    4 +-
>>   drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/stf.c          |    4 +-
>>   25 files changed, 1342 insertions(+), 1178 deletions(-)
>>
> Hi Arend,
>
> the code handling sprom looks better that before, but why don't you use
> a struct for the sprom and put all the stuff into it like it is done in
> ssb/bcma? We have haven't observance any problem using structs in b43 on
> pci bus and SoCs with a nvram storing the sprom variables.

If all lookup is done during driver initialization I guess it is not 
such a problem. I do not know how much cycles are involved in sprom or 
nvram access so it may not even matter.

> I found some references to SROM4_ and other older version, but I think
> this driver only supports devices with sprom 8 and 9.
>
> Hauke

Older sprom revisions can indeed go.

Thanks,
Arend