From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:49171 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752044AbcCJOwM (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Mar 2016 09:52:12 -0500 From: Jes Sorensen To: Kalle Valo Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 037/113] rtl8xxxu: First stab at adding IQK calibration for 8723bu parts References: <1456783551-28315-1-git-send-email-Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com> <1456783551-28315-38-git-send-email-Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com> <8737ryl8c4.fsf@purkki.adurom.net> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 09:52:10 -0500 In-Reply-To: <8737ryl8c4.fsf@purkki.adurom.net> (Kalle Valo's message of "Thu, 10 Mar 2016 16:24:11 +0200") Message-ID: (sfid-20160310_155216_159151_5B989304) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Kalle Valo writes: > Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com writes: > >> From: Jes Sorensen >> >> The 8723bu also has it's own IQK calibration process. This is similar >> in flow, but still different enough to warrent it's own >> implementation, at least for now. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jes Sorensen >> --- >> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/rtl8xxxu.c | 811 >> ++++++++++++++++++++- >> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/rtl8xxxu.h | 1 + >> .../net/wireless/realtek/rtl8xxxu/rtl8xxxu_regs.h | 17 + >> 3 files changed, 827 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> > > [...] > >> +#ifdef RTL8723BU_BT >> + /* GNT_BT = 1 */ >> + rtl8xxxu_write32(priv, REG_BT_CONTROL_8723BU, 0x00001800); >> +#endif > > What's this about? > >> +#ifdef RTL8723BU_BT >> + /* GNT_BT = 1 */ >> + rtl8xxxu_write32(priv, REG_BT_CONTROL_8723BU, 0x00001800); >> +#endif > > Same here. > >> +#ifdef RTL8723BU_PATH_B >> +static int rtl8723bu_iqk_path_b(struct rtl8xxxu_priv *priv) > > And this? > >> +#if 0 >> + /* Page B init */ >> + rtl8xxxu_write32(priv, REG_CONFIG_ANT_A, 0x0f600000); >> + >> + if (priv->tx_paths > 1) >> + rtl8xxxu_write32(priv, REG_CONFIG_ANT_B, 0x0f600000); >> +#endif > > Like discussed before, "#if 0" is not really welcomed in upstream. Can't > you just keep the unimplemented parts in a private branch and submit > them once they are ready? That way upstream code is not cluttered with > these. This is removed in a follow-on patch, so it becomes a non-issue. Rebasing this to remove it retroactively would create a mess. Jes