Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless+bounces-2574-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
Message-ID: <bf9e79e9-2b49-48dc-984e-b6e9e6723f5f@quicinc.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 10:23:41 -0800
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/11] wifi: ath12k: fix incorrect logic of calculating
 vdev_stats_id
Content-Language: en-US
From: Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@quicinc.com>
To: Kang Yang <quic_kangyang@quicinc.com>, <ath12k@lists.infradead.org>
CC: <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20240126115231.356658-1-quic_kangyang@quicinc.com>
 <20240126115231.356658-11-quic_kangyang@quicinc.com>
 <0dd4948b-e967-4562-b98e-2f4643205ca4@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <0dd4948b-e967-4562-b98e-2f4643205ca4@quicinc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 1/26/2024 8:56 AM, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> but why isn't this instead using ATH12K_MAX_VDEV_STATS_ID (which is
> currently unused)
> 
> But even the current value for that seems wrong based upon the firmware
> documentation:
>     /**
>      * vdev_stats_id indicates the ID for the REO Rx stats collection
>      * For Beryllium: 0-47 is the valid range and >=48 is invalid
>      * This vdev_stats_id field should be ignored unless the
>      * vdev_stats_id_valid field is non-zero.
>      */

After sending this I realized the value of ATH12K_MAX_VDEV_STATS_ID is
correct, and IMO should be used by the current logic. Use of hex in the
macro vs decimal in the firmware documentation confused me...