Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> The logic responsible for processing the event is
> no different across different firmware binaries.
> The difference that needs to be dealt with is the
> ABI of data structures.
>
> The intermediate structure uses __le32 to avoid
> extra memory allocations to byteswap
> variable-length substructures (i.e. host mem
> chunks).
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@xxxxxxxxx>
[...]
> + if (test_bit(ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_WMI_10X, ar->fw_features)) {
> + ret = ath10k_wmi_10x_pull_svc_rdy_ev(skb, &arg);
> + wmi_10x_svc_map(arg.service_map, svc_bmap);
> + } else {
> + ret = ath10k_wmi_pull_svc_rdy_ev(skb, &arg);
> + wmi_main_svc_map(arg.service_map, svc_bmap);
> + }
For consistency shouldn't the latter be
ath10k_wmi_main_pull_svc_rdy_ev()?
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/wmi.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/wmi.h
> @@ -1394,6 +1394,7 @@ struct wlan_host_mem_req {
> * wmi_service_ready_event,e.g., 11ac pass some of the
> * device capability to the host.
> */
> +
> struct wmi_service_ready_event {
> __le32 sw_version;
> __le32 sw_version_1;
Isn't this unneeded change?
--
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
