[PATCH 2/4] ath10k: Add provision for Rx descriptor abstraction

[Thiagarajan, Vasanthakumar]

On Wednesday 27 July 2016 06:13 PM, Michal Kazior wrote:
> On 27 July 2016 at 14:36, Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan
> <vthiagar at qti.qualcomm.com> wrote:
>> There are slight differences in Rx hw descriptor information
>> among different chips. So far driver does not use those new
>> information for any functionalities, but there is one important
>> information which is available from QCA99X0 onwards to indicate
>> the number of bytes that hw padded at the begining of the rx
>> payload and this information is needed to undecap the rx
>> packet. Add an abstraction for Rx desc to make use of the
>> new desc information available. The callback that this patch
>> defines to retrieve the padding bytes will be used in follow-up
>> patch.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan <vthiagar at qti.qualcomm.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/core.c | 12 ++++++++++++
>>   drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/hw.c   | 13 +++++++++++++
>>   drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/hw.h   | 12 ++++++++++++
>>   3 files changed, 37 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/core.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/core.c
>> index e889829..9c5e93b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/core.c
>> @@ -68,6 +68,7 @@ static const struct ath10k_hw_params ath10k_hw_params_list[] = {
>>                          .board_size = QCA988X_BOARD_DATA_SZ,
>>                          .board_ext_size = QCA988X_BOARD_EXT_DATA_SZ,
>>                  },
>> +               .hw_rx_desc_ops = &qca988x_rx_desc_ops,
> [...]
>> +struct ath10k_hw_rx_desc_ops {
>> +       int (*rx_desc_get_l3_pad_bytes)(struct htt_rx_desc *rxd);
>> +};
>
> Benjamin is trying to implement coverage class by poking hw registers
> over firmware's head [1]. I'm thinking the hw_rx_desc_ops could be
> generalized to hw_ops so it can be used for doing hw-specific hacks as
> well. What do you think?

Sure. Instead of reworking this patch set, can this be done in a separate patch?.

Vasanth