Re: [PATCH 1/2] wireless: mt76: call hweight8() instead of __sw_hweight8()

[Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>]

On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:38 AM Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>
> Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> writes:
>
> > Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> writes:
> >
> >> Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> __sw_hweight8() is just internal implementation.
> >>>
> >>> Drivers should use the common API, hweight8().
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
> >>
> >> Acked-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
> >>
> >>> This patch should go to x86 tree along with 2/2.
> >>>
> >>> Otherwise, all{yes,mod}config of x86 would be broken.
> >>>
> >>> This patch is trivial enough.
> >>> I want ACK from the net/wireless maintainer
> >>> so that this can go in via x86 tree.
> >>
> >> Sounds good to me, feel free to push via the x86 tree.
> >
> > Actually, can you wait a bit? Felix just reminded me that we have a
> > similar patch pending from Ben Hutchings:
> >
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10808203/
> >
> > And it seems there are two instances of __sw_hweight8, at least in my
> > wireless-drivers-next tree:
> >
> > drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c: int i, nstream =
> > __sw_hweight8(dev->antenna_mask);
> > drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c: int n_chains =
> > __sw_hweight8(dev->antenna_mask);
> >
> > So we need to think what to do.
>
> I think the best would be that Felix applies Ben's patch to the wireless
> tree and I'll push it to Linus during the next merge window (via
> net-next). Simpler and less conflicts that way.
>
> So Masahiro, could you hold your x86 patch for a while until the mt76
> patch will be in Linus' tree? That should not take more than two weeks,
> I think.

Sure.
I will resend 2/2 later.




-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada