MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1479141222-8493-7-git-send-email-erik.stromdahl@gmail.com>
References: <1479141222-8493-1-git-send-email-erik.stromdahl@gmail.com> <1479141222-8493-7-git-send-email-erik.stromdahl@gmail.com>
From: Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@tieto.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 11:28:38 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+BoTQ=jSun0Je6sVsZz-SaiDA6+nZxSTJF_5OH0unPkjm1gvw@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20161115_112844_343522_C3225E89)
Subject: Re: [RFC 06/12] ath10k: bmi: Added SOC reg read/write functions
To: Erik Stromdahl <erik.stromdahl@gmail.com>
Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com>,
        linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        "ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On 14 November 2016 at 17:33, Erik Stromdahl <erik.stromdahl@gmail.com> wro=
te:
> Added functions implementing the following BMI commands:
>
> BMI_READ_SOC_REGISTER
> BMI_WRITE_SOC_REGISTER
>
> Reading and writing BMI registers is sometimes needed for
> SDIO chipsets.

I didn't see ath10k_bmi_write_soc_reg nor ath10k_bmi_read_soc_reg
being used in your Patch 12. Is this patch really necessary?


[...]
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/bmi.c b/drivers/net/wireless=
/ath/ath10k/bmi.c
> index 2872d34..1c378a2 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/bmi.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/bmi.c
> @@ -97,7 +97,8 @@ int ath10k_bmi_read_memory(struct ath10k *ar,
>         u32 rxlen;
>         int ret;
>
> -       ath10k_dbg(ar, ATH10K_DBG_BMI, "bmi read address 0x%x length %d\n=
",
> +       ath10k_dbg(ar, ATH10K_DBG_BMI,
> +                  "bmi read memory address 0x%x length %d\n",
>                    address, length);
>
>         if (ar->bmi.done_sent) {
> @@ -137,7 +138,8 @@ int ath10k_bmi_write_memory(struct ath10k *ar,
>         u32 txlen;
>         int ret;
>
> -       ath10k_dbg(ar, ATH10K_DBG_BMI, "bmi write address 0x%x length %d\=
n",
> +       ath10k_dbg(ar, ATH10K_DBG_BMI,
> +                  "bmi write memory address 0x%x length %d\n",
>                    address, length);
>

These 2 hunks shouldn't be modified in this patch. If you want to do a
clean up this warrants a separate patch :)


Micha=C5=82