Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1559116487-5244-1-git-send-email-yhchuang@realtek.com> <1559116487-5244-10-git-send-email-yhchuang@realtek.com>
In-Reply-To: <1559116487-5244-10-git-send-email-yhchuang@realtek.com>
From:   Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Date:   Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:05:37 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+ASDXMWYhORB7=bCh84BO1wuPdAa7dpTSyTWuUYzanfTYA=Pw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] rtw88: remove all RTW_MAX_POWER_INDEX macro
To:     Tony Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com>
Cc:     Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
        linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

I realize this is already upstream, but I thought I'd ask here, since
I was going back and reviewing some of this:

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 12:55 AM <yhchuang@realtek.com> wrote:
>
> From: Tzu-En Huang <tehuang@realtek.com>
>
> Since this macro definition has different values in different chipset,
> the current defined macro value is for 8822b. This will cause the
> settings of 8822c be incorrect.

^^ Is this actually correct, that 8822b was correct and 8822c was
wrong? Because I see RTW_MAX_POWER_INDEX used to be defined as 0x7f,
and rtw8822c_hw_spec.max_power_index also appears to be 0x7f. Which
would sound like 8822b (*b*, not c) was wrong, as it lists 0x3f.

Anyway, I'm going to assume you got the change right, and you just
mis-spoke in the description.

Regards,
Brian

> Remove RTW_MAX_POWER_INDEX and use max_power_index in struct rtw_chip_info
> to make sure the value of different chipset is right.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tzu-En Huang <tehuang@realtek.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yan-Hsuan Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com>