Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 16 October 2013 06:46, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> To make it easier to access SOC registers. No functional
>> changes.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.c | 3 +--
>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.h | 10 ++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.c
>> index d09f8a2..5c78383 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.c
>> @@ -2454,8 +2454,7 @@ static int ath10k_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> - chip_id = ath10k_pci_read32(ar,
>> - RTC_SOC_BASE_ADDRESS + SOC_CHIP_ID_ADDRESS);
>> + chip_id = ath10k_pci_soc_read32(ar, SOC_CHIP_ID_ADDRESS);
>>
>> ath10k_do_pci_sleep(ar);
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.h b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.h
>> index 52fb7b9..a304c33 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.h
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/pci.h
>> @@ -318,6 +318,16 @@ static inline u32 ath10k_pci_read32(struct ath10k *ar, u32 offset)
>> return ioread32(ar_pci->mem + offset);
>> }
>>
>> +static inline u32 ath10k_pci_soc_read32(struct ath10k *ar, u32 addr)
>> +{
>> + return ath10k_pci_read32(ar, RTC_SOC_BASE_ADDRESS + addr);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline void ath10k_pci_soc_write32(struct ath10k *ar, u32 addr, u32 val)
>> +{
>> + ath10k_pci_write32(ar, RTC_SOC_BASE_ADDRESS + addr, val);
>> +}
>> +
>
> I'm not entirely sure about this. There are a couple of soc address
> groups (RTC_SOC, RTC_WMAC, SOC_PCIE, SOC_CORE, ..).
And then we can have different functions for each group.
> I'd rather use just raw ioread/iowrite than have all those wrappers.
Well, I again would prefer to have clean interfaces instead of doing
address arithmetic in every call :)
> I think the reason for having ath10k_pci_{read,write}32 was the HW v1
> workaround.
No, it was also to make the code simple.
> Do we really need to keep it?
In my opinion yes. What is the negative side of keeping them? Why don't
you like these wrappers?
--
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
