[PATCH 09/10] wifi: mt76: mt7996: rework background radar check for mt7990

[Shayne Chen]

On Mon, 2025-03-31 at 05:55 +0000, Ping-Ke Shih wrote:
> 
> External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until
> you have verified the sender or the content.
> 
> 
> Shayne Chen <shayne.chen at mediatek.com> wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > +
> > +bool mt7996_eeprom_has_background_radar(struct mt7996_dev *dev)
> > +{
> > +       switch (mt76_chip(&dev->mt76)) {
> > +       case MT7996_DEVICE_ID:
> > +               if (dev->var.type == MT7996_VAR_TYPE_233)
> > +                       return false;
> > +               break;
> > +       case MT7992_DEVICE_ID:
> > +               if (dev->var.type == MT7992_VAR_TYPE_23)
> > +                       return false;
> > +               break;
> > +       case MT7990_DEVICE_ID: {
> > +               u8 path, rx_path, nss, *eeprom = dev-
> > >mt76.eeprom.data;
> > +
> > +               mt7996_eeprom_parse_stream(eeprom, MT_BAND1, &path,
> > &rx_path, &nss);
> > +               /* Disable background radar capability in 3T3R */
> > +               if (path == 3 || rx_path == 3)
> > +                       return false;
> > +               break;
> > +       }
> 
> The indentation of close brace looks weird.

Will fix it, thanks.
> 
> Since -Wdeclaration-after-statement is dropped, I think compilers
> will not
> warn without the braces. But note that it is still not recommended to
> put declarations in the middle.
> 
Since those variables are currently only used by mt7990 case, I think
they can be putting there for the moment.

> > +       default:
> > +               return false;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       return true;
> > +}
> 
> 
>