From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]:34880 "EHLO wolverine01.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751243AbaHNIkv (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Aug 2014 04:40:51 -0400 From: Kalle Valo To: Michal Kazior CC: , Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] ath10k: split ce irq/handler setup References: <1407402260-29854-1-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com> <1407402260-29854-5-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com> Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 11:40:43 +0300 In-Reply-To: <1407402260-29854-5-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com> (Michal Kazior's message of "Thu, 7 Aug 2014 11:04:19 +0200") Message-ID: <87a977o450.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (sfid-20140814_104056_728891_CCE4961F) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Michal Kazior writes: > It doesn't make much sense to overwrite send_cb > and recv_cb callbacks over and over again whenever > transport starts. Just make sure to unmask copy > engine interrupts when starting. > > Signed-off-by: Michal Kazior The patch looks, just a followup question for the future: > @@ -1674,7 +1639,9 @@ static int ath10k_pci_ce_init(struct ath10k *ar) > pipe_info->hif_ce_state = ar; > attr = &host_ce_config_wlan[pipe_num]; > > - ret = ath10k_ce_init_pipe(ar, pipe_num, attr); > + ret = ath10k_ce_init_pipe(ar, pipe_num, attr, > + ath10k_pci_ce_send_done, > + ath10k_pci_ce_recv_data); As we call ath10k_ce_init_pipe() only once and seem to have only one set of functions, why even bother bother with function pointers? What if we just call the functions directly? -- Kalle Valo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1XHqau-0007p1-8E for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 08:41:12 +0000 From: Kalle Valo Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] ath10k: split ce irq/handler setup References: <1407402260-29854-1-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com> <1407402260-29854-5-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com> Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 11:40:43 +0300 In-Reply-To: <1407402260-29854-5-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com> (Michal Kazior's message of "Thu, 7 Aug 2014 11:04:19 +0200") Message-ID: <87a977o450.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: Michal Kazior Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath10k@lists.infradead.org Michal Kazior writes: > It doesn't make much sense to overwrite send_cb > and recv_cb callbacks over and over again whenever > transport starts. Just make sure to unmask copy > engine interrupts when starting. > > Signed-off-by: Michal Kazior The patch looks, just a followup question for the future: > @@ -1674,7 +1639,9 @@ static int ath10k_pci_ce_init(struct ath10k *ar) > pipe_info->hif_ce_state = ar; > attr = &host_ce_config_wlan[pipe_num]; > > - ret = ath10k_ce_init_pipe(ar, pipe_num, attr); > + ret = ath10k_ce_init_pipe(ar, pipe_num, attr, > + ath10k_pci_ce_send_done, > + ath10k_pci_ce_recv_data); As we call ath10k_ce_init_pipe() only once and seem to have only one set of functions, why even bother bother with function pointers? What if we just call the functions directly? -- Kalle Valo _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k