Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Authenticated-By: 
From:   Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>
To:     <kvalo@kernel.org>
CC:     <kevin_yang@realtek.com>, <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 2/6] wifi: rtw89: refine rtw89_correct_cck_chan() by rtw89_hw_to_nl80211_band()
Date:   Wed, 16 Aug 2023 16:21:29 +0800
Message-ID: <20230816082133.57474-3-pkshih@realtek.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230816082133.57474-1-pkshih@realtek.com>
References: <20230816082133.57474-1-pkshih@realtek.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Content-Type:   text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

From: Zong-Zhe Yang <kevin_yang@realtek.com>

In rtw89_correct_cck_chan(), we turn to use rtw89_hw_to_nl80211_band().
The difference between rtw89_hw_to_nl80211_band() and the original raw
judgement is the case on 6 GHz. Since rtw89_correct_cck_chan() is common
code independent on chip, if runtime chip doesn't support 6 GHz, it is
probably safe. Otherwise, it might not.

Signed-off-by: Zong-Zhe Yang <kevin_yang@realtek.com>
Signed-off-by: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/core.c | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/core.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/core.c
index a338b0a97910..aedabd262251 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/core.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/core.c
@@ -1659,8 +1659,7 @@ static void rtw89_correct_cck_chan(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev,
 	const struct rtw89_chan_rcd *rcd =
 		rtw89_chan_rcd_get(rtwdev, RTW89_SUB_ENTITY_0);
 	u16 chan = rcd->prev_primary_channel;
-	u8 band = rcd->prev_band_type == RTW89_BAND_2G ?
-		  NL80211_BAND_2GHZ : NL80211_BAND_5GHZ;
+	u8 band = rtw89_hw_to_nl80211_band(rcd->prev_band_type);
 
 	if (status->band != NL80211_BAND_2GHZ &&
 	    status->encoding == RX_ENC_LEGACY &&
-- 
2.25.1