Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2022 9:31 PM
>> To: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Kevin Yang <kevin_yang@xxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] wifi: rtw89: mac: process MCC related C2H
>>
>> Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > From: Zong-Zhe Yang <kevin_yang@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >
>> > Process C2H(s) related to MCC (multi-channel concurrency). These handling,
>> > which either call rtw89_complete_cond() or show message in debug mode, can
>> > be considered atomic/lock-free. So, they should be safe to be processed
>> > directly after C2H pre-check in previous patch.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Zong-Zhe Yang <kevin_yang@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > Signed-off-by: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > +static
>> > +void (* const rtw89_mac_c2h_mcc_handler[])(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev,
>> > + struct sk_buff *c2h, u32 len) = {
>> > + [RTW89_MAC_C2H_FUNC_MCC_RCV_ACK] = rtw89_mac_c2h_mcc_rcv_ack,
>> > + [RTW89_MAC_C2H_FUNC_MCC_REQ_ACK] = rtw89_mac_c2h_mcc_req_ack,
>> > + [RTW89_MAC_C2H_FUNC_MCC_TSF_RPT] = rtw89_mac_c2h_mcc_tsf_rpt,
>> > + [RTW89_MAC_C2H_FUNC_MCC_STATUS_RPT] = rtw89_mac_c2h_mcc_status_rpt,
>> > +};
>>
>> static const?
>>
>
> These are function pointers, so const is before instance name,
> i.e. '... const rtw89_mac_c2h_mcc_handler ..'
Ah indeed, missed that. Thanks.
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
