Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Thu, 2023-05-25 at 19:07 +0300, Kalle Valo wrote:
>
>>
>> Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > The register-based H2C/C2H are used to exchange commands and events with
>> > firmware. The exchange data is limited, but it is relatively simple,
>> > because it can work before HCI initialization. To make these code clean,
>> > use struct to access them. This patch doesn't change logic at all.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/fw.h
>> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/fw.h
>> > @@ -18,15 +18,51 @@ enum rtw89_fw_dl_status {
>> > RTW89_FWDL_WCPU_FW_INIT_RDY = 7
>> > };
>> >
>> > -#define RTW89_GET_C2H_HDR_FUNC(info) \
>> > - u32_get_bits(info, GENMASK(6, 0))
>> > -#define RTW89_GET_C2H_HDR_LEN(info) \
>> > - u32_get_bits(info, GENMASK(11, 8))
>> > +struct rtw89_c2hreg_hdr {
>> > + u32 w0;
>> > +};
>>
>> Why this is u32? Shouldn't it be __le32?
>>
>> > +#define RTW89_C2HREG_HDR_FUNC_MASK GENMASK(6, 0)
>> > +#define RTW89_C2HREG_HDR_ACK BIT(7)
>> > +#define RTW89_C2HREG_HDR_LEN_MASK GENMASK(11, 8)
>> > +#define RTW89_C2HREG_HDR_SEQ_MASK GENMASK(15, 12)
>> > +
>> > +struct rtw89_c2hreg_phycap {
>> > + u32 w0;
>> > + u32 w1;
>> > + u32 w2;
>> > + u32 w3;
>> > +} __packed;
>>
>> Here as well? And I saw more in the patch.
>>
>> Of course these were already there so isn't a problem introduced by this
>> patchset, but I started wondering if we are missing some little endian
>> types?
>>
>
> I had the same question as yours when I did this conversion, but they
> are correct because we access these H2C commands/C2H events via registers
> which are CPU order.
Ah, thanks for the explanation.
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
