linux-wireless.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan <mohammed@qca.qualcomm.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <rodrigue@qca.qualcomm.com>
Cc: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
	<ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>, <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] [RFC] ath9k_hw: Fix chip revision checks
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 10:06:02 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F5ECEB2.7050903@qca.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120312201650.GG26059@tux>

Hi Luis,

On Tuesday 13 March 2012 01:46 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 02:46:04PM +0530, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
>> Hi Felix,
>>
>> On Monday 12 March 2012 02:32 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>>> On 2012-03-12 6:57 AM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
>>>> From: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan<mohammed@qca.qualcomm.com>
>>>>
>>>> not sure if these checks are previously avoided may be those revision of
>>>> chipsets are obselete ?
>>> NACK. The extra checks that this patch adds have been intentionally
>>> removed, since all earlier versions were never sold and thus do not need
>>> to be considered. This simplifies the generated binary code.
>>
>> IMHO i don't think this patch does anything wrong to deserve a NACK!
>> sometimes these optimizations make it tad difficult if we want to
>> quickly check with the HAL code.
>
> "HAL" code from internal codebases need to change, not the other
> way around. You have your priorities wrong. I support the NACK.
>

we have checks like this

case 1.#define AR_SREV_9280_20_OR_LATER(_ah) \
	(((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion >= AR_SREV_VERSION_9280))

case 2. #define AR_SREV_9485_OR_LATER(_ah) \
	(((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion >= AR_SREV_VERSION_9485))


case 3. #define AR_SREV_9287_13_OR_LATER(_ah) \
	(((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion > AR_SREV_VERSION_9287) || \
	 (((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion == AR_SREV_VERSION_9287) && \
	  ((_ah)->hw_version.macRev >= AR_SREV_REVISION_9287_13)))

it made be bit confused and i was just adding some hardware related 
changes, let me do accept i missed to see why the check for AR9280 is 
like that. i just thought of making the changes in sync with the other 
macros, also thats why sent an RFC too

Felix suggested a better solution would be

#define AR_SREV_9280_OR_LATER(_ah) \
	(((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion >= AR_SREV_VERSION_9280))

instead of the older one (or) what my patch does

#define AR_SREV_9280_20_OR_LATER(_ah) \
	(((_ah)->hw_version.macVersion >= AR_SREV_VERSION_9280))

and make corresponding changes in the hardware code.

thanks!


-- 
thanks,
shafi

  reply	other threads:[~2012-03-13  4:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-03-12  5:57 [RFC] ath9k_hw: Fix chip revision checks Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan
2012-03-12  9:02 ` [ath9k-devel] " Felix Fietkau
2012-03-12  9:16   ` Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan
2012-03-12  9:41     ` Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan
2012-03-12 20:16     ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2012-03-13  4:36       ` Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan [this message]
2012-03-12  9:44 ` Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan

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=4F5ECEB2.7050903@qca.qualcomm.com \
    --to=mohammed@qca.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=nbd@openwrt.org \
    --cc=rodrigue@qca.qualcomm.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).