From: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>
To: Mohammed Anees <pvmohammedanees2003@gmail.com>,
"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] wifi: rtw88: Refactor looping in rtw_phy_store_tx_power_by_rate
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 01:21:54 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c0f6c6c3b87c4d048ad9f42dc1dfaed9@realtek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241016060605.11359-1-pvmohammedanees2003@gmail.com>
Mohammed Anees <pvmohammedanees2003@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The previous implementation performs check for the band
> in each iteration, which is unnecessary and further more
> there is a else condition which will never get triggered,
I feel compilers can optimize the check for the band, and we can just remove
the else condition. Or
if (2ghz)
foo_2g();
else
foo_5g();
> since a check is done to see if the band is either 2G or
> 5G earlier and the band either be any of those 2. We can
> refactor this by assigning a pointer to the appropriate
> power offset array based on the band before the loop and
> updating this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mohammed Anees <pvmohammedanees2003@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/phy.c | 11 +++++------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/phy.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/phy.c
> index 37ef80c9091d..17d61f1d9257 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/phy.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/phy.c
> @@ -1465,15 +1465,14 @@ static void rtw_phy_store_tx_power_by_rate(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev,
> rate_num > RTW_RF_PATH_MAX))
> return;
>
> + s8 (*tx_pwr_by_rate_offset) = (band == PHY_BANK_2G)
> + ? hal->tx_pwr_by_rate_offset_2g[rfpath]
> + : hal->tx_pwr_by_rate_offset_5g[rfpath];
> +
Though -Wdeclaration-after-statement was dropped, still recommend to place
declarations at the beginning of function.
The operands ? and : should place at the end of statement.
x = y ?
z0 :
z1;
> for (i = 0; i < rate_num; i++) {
> offset = pwr_by_rate[i];
> rate = rates[i];
> - if (band == PHY_BAND_2G)
> - hal->tx_pwr_by_rate_offset_2g[rfpath][rate] = offset;
> - else if (band == PHY_BAND_5G)
> - hal->tx_pwr_by_rate_offset_5g[rfpath][rate] = offset;
> - else
> - continue;
> + tx_pwr_by_rate_offset[rate] = offset;
> }
> }
>
> --
> 2.47.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-17 1:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-16 6:06 [PATCH] wifi: rtw88: Refactor looping in rtw_phy_store_tx_power_by_rate Mohammed Anees
2024-10-17 1:21 ` Ping-Ke Shih [this message]
2024-10-17 6:56 ` Mohammed Anees
2024-10-17 7:06 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2024-10-17 7:12 ` Mohammed Anees
2024-10-17 3:19 ` kernel test robot
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=c0f6c6c3b87c4d048ad9f42dc1dfaed9@realtek.com \
--to=pkshih@realtek.com \
--cc=kvalo@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pvmohammedanees2003@gmail.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