lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Apr]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] rtw88: Add delay on polling h2c command status bit
From
Date


> On Apr 6, 2020, at 22:03, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>
> Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com> writes:
>
>>> On Apr 6, 2020, at 21:24, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>> On Apr 6, 2020, at 20:17, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/hci.h
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/hci.h
>>>>>> @@ -253,6 +253,10 @@ rtw_write8_mask(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev, u32
>>>>>> addr, u32 mask, u8 data)
>>>>>> rtw_write8(rtwdev, addr, set);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +#define rr8(addr) rtw_read8(rtwdev, addr)
>>>>>> +#define rr16(addr) rtw_read16(rtwdev, addr)
>>>>>> +#define rr32(addr) rtw_read32(rtwdev, addr)
>>>>>
>>>>> For me these macros reduce code readability, not improve anything. They
>>>>> hide the use of rtwdev variable, which is evil, and a name like rr8() is
>>>>> just way too vague. Please keep the original function names as is.
>>>>
>>>> The inspiration is from another driver.
>>>> readx_poll_timeout macro only takes one argument for the op.
>>>> Some other drivers have their own poll_timeout implementation,
>>>> and I guess it makes sense to make one specific for rtw88.
>>>
>>> I'm not even understanding the problem you are tying to fix with these
>>> macros. The upstream philosopyhy is to have the source code readable and
>>> maintainable, not to use minimal number of characters. There's a reason
>>> why we don't name our functions a(), b(), c() and so on.
>>
>> The current h2c polling doesn't have delay between each interval, so
>> the polling is too fast and the following logic considers it's a
>> timeout.
>> The readx_poll_timeout() macro provides a generic mechanism to setup
>> an interval delay and timeout which is what we need here.
>> However readx_poll_timeout only accepts one parameter which usually is
>> memory address, while we need to pass both rtwdev and address.
>>
>> So if hiding rtwdev is evil, we can roll our own variant of
>> readx_poll_timeout() to make the polling readable.
>
> Can't you do:
>
> ret = read_poll_timeout(rtw_read8, box_state,
> !((box_state >> box) & 0x1), 100,
> 3000, false, rtw_dev, REG_HMETFR);
>
> No ugly macros needed and it should function the same. But I did not
> test this in any way, so no idea if it even compiles.

Yes that will do. Didn't notice the recently added macro.

Will send v2.

Kai-Heng

>
> --
> https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-04-07 09:21    [W:0.048 / U:0.484 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site