> On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 03:55:05PM +0900, Manjae Cho wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 12:50:54AM +0900, Manjae Cho wrote: > > > > This patch improves the usage of the MAR register by updating the > > > > relevant macro definitions and ensuring consistent usage across > > > > the codebase. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Manjae Cho <manjae.cho@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > --- > > > > drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/sdio_halinit.c | 4 ++-- > > > > drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/include/hal_com_reg.h | 3 +++ > > > > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/sdio_halinit.c > > > > b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/sdio_halinit.c > > > > index c9cd6578f7f8..9493562c1619 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/sdio_halinit.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/sdio_halinit.c > > > > @@ -380,8 +380,8 @@ static void _InitWMACSetting(struct adapter > > > *padapter) > > > > rtw_write32(padapter, REG_RCR, pHalData->ReceiveConfig); > > > > > > > > /* Accept all multicast address */ > > > > - rtw_write32(padapter, REG_MAR, 0xFFFFFFFF); > > > > - rtw_write32(padapter, REG_MAR + 4, 0xFFFFFFFF); > > > > + rtw_write32(padapter, MAR0, 0xFFFFFFFF); > > > > + rtw_write32(padapter, MAR4, 0xFFFFFFFF); > > > > > > > > /* Accept all data frames */ > > > > value16 = 0xFFFF; > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/include/hal_com_reg.h > > > > b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/include/hal_com_reg.h > > > > index 9a02ae69d7a4..baf326d53a46 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/include/hal_com_reg.h > > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/include/hal_com_reg.h > > > > @@ -151,6 +151,9 @@ > > > > #define REG_BSSID 0x0618 > > > > #define REG_MAR > > 0x0620 > > > > > > > > +#define MAR0 REG_MAR > > > /* Multicast Address Register, Offset 0x0620-0x0623 */ > > > > > > Why redefine this value again? What is wrong with using it as > "REG_MAR"? > > > Is this fixing anything or making anything more consistent somewhere? > > > It's only used in one place that I can see. > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > greg k-h > > > > Dear Greg, > > > > Thank you for your feedback. I appreciate your point about the current > > usage of REG_MAR. While it's true that it's only used in one place > > currently, I believe there's value in making this change for the > following reasons: > > > > - Consistency: Other similar registers in the codebase use this pattern. > > For example, we have IDR0 and IDR4 for MACID registers. Adding MAR0 > > and MAR4 brings consistency to our register naming convention. > > > > - Clarity: The +4 offset in "REG_MAR + 4" isn't immediately clear > > without context. MAR4 makes it explicit that we're dealing with the > > next 4 bytes of the Multicast Address Register. > > > > - If we need to use these registers elsewhere in the future, having > > clear, specific names will make the code more readable. > > You aren't going to use them elsewhere, worry about this then, not now. > > > However, I understand if you feel this change doesn't provide enough > > benefit to justify inclusion. If you prefer, I could modify the patch > > to keep the REG_MAR usage but add comments for clarity: > > > > /* Multicast Address Register */ > > rtw_write32(padapter, REG_MAR, 0xFFFFFFFF); /* Offset 0x0620- > 0x0623 > > */ > > rtw_write32(padapter, REG_MAR + 4, 0xFFFFFFFF); /* Offset > > 0x0624-0x0627 */ > > That seems a lot more sane and simpler. > > thanks, > > greg k-h Dear Greg, Thank you for your guidance. I appreciate your perspective on keeping the code simple and addressing current needs rather than potential future uses. I agree that adding comments for clarity is a more straightforward approach. I'll revise the patch accordingly I'll submit this updated patch shortly. Thank you again for your time and feedback. Thank you Best Regards Manjae Cho
