On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 20:08 +0200, ext Shahar Levi wrote:
> Added ACX command to the FW for 11n support.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shahar Levi <shahar_levi@xxxxxx>
> ---
Again, mostly coding-style comments.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/wl1271_acx.c b/drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/wl1271_acx.c
> index 6189934..cc6b7d8 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/wl1271_acx.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/wl1271_acx.c
> @@ -1226,6 +1226,97 @@ out:
> return ret;
> }
>
> +int wl1271_acx_set_ht_capabilities(struct wl1271 *wl,
> + struct ieee80211_sta_ht_cap *ht_cap,
> + bool allow_ht_operation)
> +{
> + struct wl1271_acx_ht_capabilities *acx;
> + /*
> + * Note, currently this value will be set to FFFFFFFFFFFF to indicate
> + * it is relevant for all peers since we only support HT in
> + * infrastructure mode. Later on this field will be relevant to
> + * IBSS/DLS operation */
> + u8 mac_address[ETH_ALEN] = {0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff};
I didn't realize this when reviewing patch 01/03, but you could actually
remove the Note from the wl1271_acx.h file and leave it here. There's
no need to have it repeated there and here.
> + /* Allow HT Operation ? */
> + if (true == allow_ht_operation) {
I know that some people like to put the constant in the left side of the
comparison operator to avoid problems with mistyping == as =, but
reading this in the opposite way is less intuitive (like top-posting? ;)
and the compiler, if called with reasonable options, will warn you if
you make that mistake. So, summarizing, please use it like this
instead, then you don't even risk mistyping == in the first place :P
if (allow_ht_operation) {
> + acx->ht_capabilites =
> + WL1271_ACX_FW_CAP_BIT_MASK_HT_OPERATION;
Add a more indentation on the second line, it's easier to read.
> + acx->ht_capabilites |=
> + ((ht_cap->cap & IEEE80211_HT_CAP_GRN_FLD) ?
> + WL1271_ACX_FW_CAP_BIT_MASK_GREENFIELD_FRAME_FORMAT : 0);
> + acx->ht_capabilites |=
> + ((ht_cap->cap & IEEE80211_HT_CAP_SGI_20) ?
> + WL1271_ACX_FW_CAP_BIT_MASK_SHORT_GI_FOR_20MHZ_PACKETS : 0);
> + acx->ht_capabilites |=
> + ((ht_cap->cap & IEEE80211_HT_CAP_LSIG_TXOP_PROT) ?
> + WL1271_ACX_FW_CAP_BIT_MASK_LSIG_TXOP_PROTECTION : 0);
Same thing for all these other assignments.
> +
> + /* get date from A-MPDU parameters field */
"get data"
> + acx->ampdu_max_length = ht_cap->ampdu_factor;
> + acx->ampdu_min_spacing = ht_cap->ampdu_density;
> +
> + memcpy(acx->mac_address, mac_address, ETH_ALEN);
> + }
> + /* HT operations are not allowed */
> + else
> + acx->ht_capabilites = 0;
According to Documentation/CodingStyle, you should write the else block
like this:
if (...) {
...
} else {
acx->ht_capabilities = 0;
}
> +int wl1271_acx_set_ht_information(struct wl1271 *wl,
> + u16 ht_operation_mode)
> +{
> + struct wl1271_acx_ht_information *acx;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + wl1271_debug(DEBUG_ACX, "acx ht information setting");
> +
> + acx = kzalloc(sizeof(*acx), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!acx) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + acx->ht_protection =
> + (u8)(ht_operation_mode & IEEE80211_HT_OP_MODE_PROTECTION);
> + acx->rifs_mode = 0;
> + acx->gf_protection = 0;
> + acx->ht_tx_burst_limit = 0;
> + acx->dual_cts_protection = 0;
> +
> + ret = wl1271_cmd_configure(wl,
> + ACX_HT_BSS_OPERATION,
> + acx,
> + sizeof(*acx));
Doesn't this fit in less lines?
--
Cheers,
Luca.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
