From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76572C432C0 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:59:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AEF62068E for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:59:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="PiNgLzAv" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728991AbfKYQ7o (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Nov 2019 11:59:44 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.81]:48504 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728976AbfKYQ7o (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Nov 2019 11:59:44 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1574701183; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=1hAA0sawVzh/zjEVh6owwytHkLmg4SFOKa07zp/0Dsw=; b=PiNgLzAv4NZhVoOIn939pDbPO8jmXRjm0tWaiIr68ivnFjV86ddovSZcci885UtdrH8Q7V 9opneIuMcRGZOl3+0BM/tAzhSFSedmb9jEN1mD8VaVqnt2Jc4LfFOhlqZFInyBb/mBedTW fB8Hmjb5Uh1yVYur8MMyrXwvomOmWDw= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-169-mT98KPTiPbS82050OmZH1A-1; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 11:59:40 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C985E108595B; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:59:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (ovpn-204-116.brq.redhat.com [10.40.204.116]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7847C60C18; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:59:34 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 17:59:33 +0100 From: Stanislaw Gruszka To: Markus Theil Cc: nbd@nbd.name, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, lorenzo.bianconi@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/6] mt76: mt76x02: split beaconing Message-ID: <20191125165932.GB14273@redhat.com> References: <20191121180001.22451-1-markus.theil@tu-ilmenau.de> <20191121180001.22451-3-markus.theil@tu-ilmenau.de> <20191125130014.GB28102@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 X-MC-Unique: mT98KPTiPbS82050OmZH1A-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 03:07:59PM +0100, Markus Theil wrote: > On 11/25/19 2:00 PM, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 06:59:57PM +0100, Markus Theil wrote: > >> +void mt76x02_mac_set_beacon_finish(struct mt76x02_dev *dev) > >> +{ > >> +=09mt76_wr(dev, MT_BCN_BYPASS_MASK, > >> +=09=090xff00 | ~bitrev8(dev->beacon_data_mask)); > > Since you arrange beacon slots continues starting from 0 > > (i.e. 0,1,2 instead of "random" vif_idx values like 0,4,6), > > I think it would make sense to keep > > MT_MAC_BSSID_DW1_MBEACON_N =3D bcn_idx - 1 and set mask unchanged. > > > > But no strong opinion here, code with bitrev8 looks fine too. > I'd like to keep the bitrev8 code, as it saves a copy over usb for usb > devices, if MT_MAC_BSSID_DW_BEACON_N is kept constant. > bitrev8 should be a rather cheap operation compared to a copy over some > form of bus. This make sense. I tested the code on MT7630E and after adding missed write_txwi function, it works fine. So I think bitrev8 code is ok. Stanislaw