[PATCH 4/3] b43: support new RX header, noticed to be used in 598.314+ fw

[Rafał Miłecki]

W dniu 11 sierpnia 2011 16:55 użytkownik Michael Büsch <m at bues.ch> napisał:
> On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:20:23 +0200
> Rafał Miłecki <zajec5 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5 at gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/wireless/b43/pio.c  |   10 +++++++++-
>>  drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.c |   21 ++++++++++++++++-----
>>  drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.h |   19 ++++++++++++++++---
>>  3 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/pio.c b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/pio.c
>> index 6e4228c..ce8a4bd 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/pio.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/pio.c
>> @@ -676,7 +676,15 @@ data_ready:
>>               goto rx_error;
>>       }
>>
>> -     macstat = le32_to_cpu(rxhdr->mac_status);
>> +     switch (dev->fw.hdr_format) {
>> +     case B43_FW_HDR_598:
>> +             macstat = le32_to_cpu(rxhdr->format_598.mac_status);
>> +             break;
>> +     case B43_FW_HDR_410:
>> +     case B43_FW_HDR_351:
>> +             macstat = le32_to_cpu(rxhdr->format_351.mac_status);
>> +             break;
>> +     }
>>       if (macstat & B43_RX_MAC_FCSERR) {
>>               if (!(q->dev->wl->filter_flags & FIF_FCSFAIL)) {
>>                       /* Drop frames with failed FCS. */
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.c b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.c
>> index b02170d..5b82409 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.c
>> @@ -653,8 +653,9 @@ void b43_rx(struct b43_wldev *dev, struct sk_buff *skb, const void *_rxhdr)
>>       struct ieee80211_hdr *wlhdr;
>>       const struct b43_rxhdr_fw4 *rxhdr = _rxhdr;
>>       __le16 fctl;
>> -     u16 phystat0, phystat3, chanstat, mactime;
>> -     u32 macstat;
>> +     u16 phystat0, phystat3;
>> +     u16 uninitialized_var(chanstat), uninitialized_var(mactime);
>> +     u32 uninitialized_var(macstat);
>>       u16 chanid;
>>       u16 phytype;
>>       int padding;
>> @@ -664,9 +665,19 @@ void b43_rx(struct b43_wldev *dev, struct sk_buff *skb, const void *_rxhdr)
>>       /* Get metadata about the frame from the header. */
>>       phystat0 = le16_to_cpu(rxhdr->phy_status0);
>>       phystat3 = le16_to_cpu(rxhdr->phy_status3);
>> -     macstat = le32_to_cpu(rxhdr->mac_status);
>> -     mactime = le16_to_cpu(rxhdr->mac_time);
>> -     chanstat = le16_to_cpu(rxhdr->channel);
>> +     switch (dev->fw.hdr_format) {
>> +     case B43_FW_HDR_598:
>> +             macstat = le32_to_cpu(rxhdr->format_598.mac_status);
>> +             mactime = le16_to_cpu(rxhdr->format_598.mac_time);
>> +             chanstat = le16_to_cpu(rxhdr->format_598.channel);
>> +             break;
>> +     case B43_FW_HDR_410:
>> +     case B43_FW_HDR_351:
>> +             macstat = le32_to_cpu(rxhdr->format_351.mac_status);
>> +             mactime = le16_to_cpu(rxhdr->format_351.mac_time);
>> +             chanstat = le16_to_cpu(rxhdr->format_351.channel);
>> +             break;
>> +     }
>>       phytype = chanstat & B43_RX_CHAN_PHYTYPE;
>>
>>       if (unlikely(macstat & B43_RX_MAC_FCSERR)) {
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.h b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.h
>> index dccf7c1..dc37297 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.h
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/xmit.h
>> @@ -250,9 +250,22 @@ struct b43_rxhdr_fw4 {
>>       } __packed;
>>       __le16 phy_status2;     /* PHY RX Status 2 */
>>       __le16 phy_status3;     /* PHY RX Status 3 */
>> -     __le32 mac_status;      /* MAC RX status */
>> -     __le16 mac_time;
>> -     __le16 channel;
>> +     union {
>> +             /* Tested with 598.314, 644.1001 and 666.2 */
>> +             struct {
>> +                     PAD_BYTES(1);
>> +                     __le32 mac_status;      /* MAC RX status */
>> +                     __le16 mac_time;
>> +                     __le16 channel;
>> +             } format_598 __packed;
>
> Is this really a 1 byte padding here? This misalignes all fields from mac_status on.
> Doesn't matter much, as the struct is packed, but it looks weird and worth
> to re-check this.

Please, review V2 of this patch :)

-- 
Rafał