Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 26 September 2013 10:54, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Bartosz Markowski <bartosz.markowski@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> @@ -1293,7 +1438,8 @@ int ath10k_wmi_pdev_resume_target(struct ath10k *ar) >>> if (skb == NULL) >>> return -ENOMEM; >>> >>> - return ath10k_wmi_cmd_send(ar, skb, WMI_PDEV_RESUME_CMDID); >>> + return ath10k_wmi_cmd_send(ar, skb, >>> + ar->wmi.cmd->wmi_pdev_resume_cmdid); >>> } >> >> I was thinking of adding a macro WMI_PDEV_RESUME_CMDID(ar) for all >> dynamic wmi ids, that way it would look as closely as possible with the >> original code. But I'm not sure if that makes sense anymore. Thoughts? > > Seems like an unnecessary indirection to me. You still need to have > the mapping structure, unless you want to use macro concatenation (##) > instead. Yeah, there's no real benefit from the macro. -- Kalle Valo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
