On 2/9/2024 3:35 AM, Nicolas Escande wrote: > As previously discussed in [1] we have a mismatch in struct scan_req_params > between the bitfield scan_f_xxx & the scan_flags when used with WMI_SCAN_XXX > values. > > To fix the issue & prevent it from happenning again lets stop using & remove > scan_flags altogether in the driver and only use the bitfield instead. That way > even if the bitfield doesn't match the WMI_SCAN_XXX flags, the right value will > still be sent through the wmi command to the firmware (see > ath11k_wmi_copy_scan_event_cntrl_flags). > > Questions: > - In the same rationale shouldn't we remove scan_events from the same struct ? yes, scan_events is unused so it and the union+struct can be removed, leaving just the u32 bitfield. feel free to submit that as a separate patch > - The same goes for ath12k, should I send a seperate patch or respin a v3 with > similar patches for ath12k ? please send a separate series for ath12k since it has a separate mailing list > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231127180559.1696041-1-nico.escande@xxxxxxxxx/ > > v2: > - remove explicit uses of scan_flags with WMI_SCAN_XXX flags > - remove the underlying union of scan_flags to only leave the bitfield > > Nicolas Escande (2): > wifi: ath11k: Do not directly use scan_flags in struct scan_req_params > wifi: ath11k: remove scan_flags union from struct scan_req_params > > drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/mac.c | 6 +-- > drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/wmi.c | 2 +- > drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/wmi.h | 55 ++++++++++++--------------- > 3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) > Thank you for this cleanup! /jeff
