On 11/28/2017 10:49 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
61 entries in this table:
static const u8 OFDM_CONFIG[] = {
0x10, 0x0F, 0x0A, 0x0C, 0x14, 0xFA, 0xFF, 0x50,
0x00, 0x50, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x5C, 0x00, 0x00,
0x40, 0x00, 0x40, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0xA8, 0x26,
0x32, 0x33, 0x06, 0xA5, 0x6F, 0x55, 0xC8, 0xBB,
0x0A, 0xE1, 0x2C, 0x4A, 0x86, 0x83, 0x34, 0x00,
0x4F, 0x24, 0x6F, 0xC2, 0x03, 0x40, 0x80, 0x00,
0xC0, 0xC1, 0x58, 0xF1, 0x00, 0xC4, 0x90, 0x3e,
0xD8, 0x3C, 0x7B, 0x10, 0x10
};
but only 60 written?
static void rtl8187se_write_ofdm_config(struct ieee80211_hw *dev)
{
/* write OFDM_CONFIG table */
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 60; i++)
rtl8225se_write_phy_ofdm(dev, i, OFDM_CONFIG[i]);
}
This is the only use of OFDM_CONFIG.
What is the defect here?
Should 60 be ARRAY_SIZE(OFDM_CONFIG) or should the array be shortened?
One too many entries or one too few a write?
My guess would be one too few a write.
Joe,
You are probably right; however, as I do not have this device and cannot test,
the safer thing would be to crop the array back to 60 entries. That way the
driver's behavior does not change.
I looked to see if rtl8187 had a similar construct, but it does not.
Larry
