[PATCH] ath10k: extend debug code for RX path

[Kalle Valo]

Janusz Dziedzic <janusz.dziedzic at tieto.com> writes:

> Print sequence number, AMSDU_MORE flag and AC when additional
> debug enabled in RX path. This is usefull for debugging purpose.
>
> Signed-off-by: Janusz Dziedzic <janusz.dziedzic at tieto.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt_rx.c |   32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt_rx.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt_rx.c
> index 6db0e49..04140e3 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt_rx.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt_rx.c
> @@ -819,19 +819,46 @@ static bool ath10k_htt_rx_h_channel(struct ath10k *ar,
>  	return true;
>  }
>  
> +static char *tid_to_ac[] = {

static const?

> +	"BE(0)",
> +	"BK(1)",
> +	"BK(2)",
> +	"BE(3)",
> +	"VI(4)",
> +	"VI(5)",
> +	"VO(6)",
> +	"VO(7)",
> +	"tid(8)",
> +	"tid(9)",
> +	"tid(10)",
> +	"tid(11)",
> +	"tid(12)",
> +	"tid(13)",
> +	"tid(14)",
> +	"tid(15)",
> +};

I don't see much point of adding tid number to the string when you could
print it with "%i". Also about the string format, maybe this would be
clearer:

"rx skb %p len %u peer %pM tid %i (%s) sn %u"

For example "...tid 4 (VI)..." and for tid > 7 we don't print "(VI)"
part at all, just the number.

>  static void ath10k_process_rx(struct ath10k *ar,
>  			      struct ieee80211_rx_status *rx_status,
>  			      struct sk_buff *skb)
>  {
>  	struct ieee80211_rx_status *status;
> +	struct ieee80211_hdr *hdr = (struct ieee80211_hdr *)skb->data;
>  
>  	status = IEEE80211_SKB_RXCB(skb);
>  	*status = *rx_status;
>  
>  	ath10k_dbg(ATH10K_DBG_DATA,
> -		   "rx skb %p len %u %s%s%s%s%s %srate_idx %u vht_nss %u freq %u band %u flag 0x%x fcs-err %imic-err %i\n",
> +		   "rx skb %p len %u peer %pM %s sn %u %s%s%s%s%s %srate_idx %u vht_nss %u freq %u band %u flag 0x%x fcs-err %i mic-err %i amsdu-more %i\n",
>  		   skb,
>  		   skb->len,
> +		   ieee80211_get_SA(hdr),

This looks ok.

> +		   ieee80211_is_data_qos(hdr->frame_control) ?
> +			(tid_to_ac[*(ieee80211_get_qos_ctl(hdr)) &
> +				   IEEE80211_QOS_CTL_TID_MASK]) :
> +			(is_multicast_ether_addr(ieee80211_get_DA(hdr)) ?
> +				"mcast" : "ucast"),
> +		   (__le16_to_cpu(hdr->seq_ctrl) & IEEE80211_SCTL_SEQ) >> 4,

But this is hard to read. Is it possible to have a helper function for
this?

-- 
Kalle Valo