Return-path: Received: from smtps.newmedia-net.de ([185.84.6.167]:39459 "EHLO webmail.newmedia-net.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753336AbeGDLFT (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jul 2018 07:05:19 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v8] ath10k: fix crash in recent 3.5.3 9984 firmware due wrong handling of peer_bw_rxnss_override parameter From: Sebastian Gottschall To: Sven Eckelmann Cc: ath10k@lists.infradead.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, kvalo@codeaurora.org References: <20180704092953.32572-1-s.gottschall@dd-wrt.com> <5630152.jDWN9V3RzB@bentobox> <0cff058a-3c4b-6617-a034-3df706ba3a32@dd-wrt.com> Message-ID: <72adf98f-94bc-27c7-4156-84072ba6aa28@dd-wrt.com> (sfid-20180704_130528_477295_A4430B03) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 13:05:20 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0cff058a-3c4b-6617-a034-3df706ba3a32@dd-wrt.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: the values within the patch are named #define BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_ENABLE???????????? BIT(31) #define BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_160MHZ_S?????????? (0) #define BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_160MHZ_M?????????? (0x00000007) #define BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_80_80MHZ_S???????? (3) #define BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_80_80MHZ_M???????? (0x00000038) #define BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_M????????????????? (0x0000003F) so your comment doesnt seem to belong to the patch. maybe the openwrt guys renamed some values in the patch. my one is based on my original sources Am 04.07.2018 um 12:48 schrieb Sebastian Gottschall: > > > Am 04.07.2018 um 12:40 schrieb Sven Eckelmann: >> On Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2018 11:29:53 CEST s.gottschall@dd-wrt.com wrote: >>> +/* Values defined to set 160 MHz Bandwidth NSS Mapping into FW*/ >>> +#define BW_NSS_FWCONF_160(x) (BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_ENABLE | \ >>> +?????????????????????????????????????? (((x - 1) << >>> BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_160MHZ_S) \ >>> +?????????????????????????????????????? & BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_160MHZ_M)) >>> +#define BW_NSS_FWCONF_80_80(x) (BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_ENABLE | \ >>> +?????????????????????????????????????? (((x - 1) << >>> BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_80_80MHZ_S) \ >>> +?????????????????????????????????????? & >>> BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_80_80MHZ_M)) >> Please check the shift and mask macros in core.h >> >> >> #define BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_160MHZ_LSB?????????? 0 >> #define BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_160MHZ_MASK????????? 0x00000007 >> #define BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_80_80MHZ_LSB???????? 3 >> #define BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_80_80MHZ_MASK??????? 0x00000038 >> #define BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_MASK???????????????? 0x0000003F >> >> #define GET_BW_NSS_FWCONF_160(x)???? (MS((x), >> BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_160MHZ) + 1) >> #define GET_BW_NSS_FWCONF_80_80(x)?? (MS((x), >> BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_80_80MHZ_M) + 1) >> >> /* Values defined to set 160 MHz Bandwidth NSS Mapping into FW*/ >> #define BW_NSS_FWCONF_160(x)???????? (BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_ENABLE | \ >> ?????????????????????????????????????? (SM((x) - 1, >> BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_160MHZ)) >> #define BW_NSS_FWCONF_80_80(x)?????? (BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_ENABLE | \ >> ?????????????????????????????????????? (SM((x) - 1, >> BW_NSS_FWCONF_MAP_80_80MHZ)) >> >> (these snippets were not yet tested and most likely need further >> adjustments) >> >> >> Kind regards, >> ????Sven > can you explain your request? the macros are unchanged and just > reformated for maximum line length restriction. the values have been > taken from QCA's wmi header > > Sebastian > >