Return-path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:41960 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751203AbeBAG4T (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Feb 2018 01:56:19 -0500 From: Kalle Valo To: Amitkumar Karwar Cc: marcel@holtmann.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Amitkumar Karwar , Prameela Rani Garnepudi , linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, Siva Rebbagondla Subject: Re: [v5 4/8] rsi: add coex support References: <1513168977-2121-1-git-send-email-amitkarwar@gmail.com> <1513168977-2121-5-git-send-email-amitkarwar@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2018 08:56:14 +0200 In-Reply-To: <1513168977-2121-5-git-send-email-amitkarwar@gmail.com> (Amitkumar Karwar's message of "Wed, 13 Dec 2017 18:12:53 +0530") Message-ID: <87r2q5mc4x.fsf@purkki.adurom.net> (sfid-20180201_075623_549808_64420D2D) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Amitkumar Karwar writes: > From: Prameela Rani Garnepudi > > With BT support, driver has to handle two streams of data > (i.e. wlan and BT). Actual coex implementation is in firmware. > Coex module just schedule the packets to firmware by taking them > from the corresponding paths. > > Structures for module and protocol operations are introduced for > this purpose. Protocol operations structure is global structure > which can be shared among different modules. Initialization of > coex and operating mode values is moved to rsi_91x_init(). > > Signed-off-by: Prameela Rani Garnepudi > Signed-off-by: Siva Rebbagondla > Signed-off-by: Amitkumar Karwar [...] > @@ -270,6 +271,7 @@ struct rsi_common { > u8 obm_ant_sel_val; > int tx_power; > u8 ant_in_use; > + struct semaphore tx_bus_lock; Do you really need to use semaphore? I think nowadays the preference is to use something other than semaphores. Also calling it tx_bus_lock is IMHO misleading, tx_bus_sema would be nicer. -- Kalle Valo