On Wed, 2024-09-04 at 17:17 +0800, Mingyen Hsieh wrote: > > @@ -443,13 +549,18 @@ static u32 ieee80211_get_rate_duration(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, > idx = status->rate_idx; > group = HE_GROUP_IDX(streams, status->he_gi, bw); > break; > + case RX_ENC_EHT: > + streams = status->nss; > + idx = status->rate_idx; > + group = EHT_GROUP_IDX(streams, status->eht.gi, bw); > + break; > default: > WARN_ON_ONCE(1); > return 0; > } > > - if (WARN_ON_ONCE((status->encoding != RX_ENC_HE && streams > 4) || > - (status->encoding == RX_ENC_HE && streams > 8))) > + if (WARN_ON_ONCE((status->encoding > RX_ENC_HE && streams > 8) || That should've been >=, but I feel like it might be better to move the warning as multiple warnings into the switch statement now? The > and < here also makes it vulnerable to reordering, which is probably not going to happen, but why put the trap here? johannes
