Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Fill mac_id and self_role depends on the operation mode.
>
> In AP mode, echo connected station has an unique mac_id, and each vif also
> has one mac_id to represent itself.
>
> The self_role is assigned to vif if the operation mode is decided, and
> RTW89_SELF_ROLE_AP_CLIENT is assigned to the connected STA in AP mode,
>
> Signed-off-by: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/fw.c | 8 ++++++--
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/fw.h | 1 +
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/mac.c | 4 ++--
> 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/fw.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/fw.c
> index 5209813275676..4641aadea0386 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/fw.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/fw.c
> @@ -993,9 +993,13 @@ int rtw89_fw_h2c_update_beacon(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev,
> #define H2C_ROLE_MAINTAIN_LEN 4
> int rtw89_fw_h2c_role_maintain(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev,
> struct rtw89_vif *rtwvif,
> + struct rtw89_sta *rtwsta,
> enum rtw89_upd_mode upd_mode)
> {
> struct sk_buff *skb;
> + u8 mac_id = rtwsta ? rtwsta->mac_id : rtwvif->mac_id;
> + u8 self_role = rtwvif->net_type == RTW89_NET_TYPE_AP_MODE && rtwsta ?
> + RTW89_SELF_ROLE_AP_CLIENT : rtwvif->self_role;
It seems you like '?' operator more than I do, and it's ok to use in
simple cases. But the latter statement is not really readable, something
like this is so much easier to read:
if (rtwvif->net_type == RTW89_NET_TYPE_AP_MODE && rtwsta)
self_role = RTW89_SELF_ROLE_AP_CLIENT
else
self_role = rtwvif->self_role;
But should there a parenthesis around the == operator? I cannot now
recall what's the preference in the kernel, can someone help on that?
Maybe I also move check for rtwsta first?
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
