Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan <[email protected]> writes: > Hello, > > On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 06:57:52PM +0000, Valo, Kalle wrote: >> Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan <[email protected]> writes: >> >> >> > +void ath10k_sta_update_rx_duration(struct ath10k *ar, >> >> > + struct ath10k_fw_stats *stats) >> >> > +{ >> >> > + struct ath10k_fw_file *fw_file = &ar->normal_mode_fw.fw_file; >> >> > + >> >> > + if (fw_file->wmi_op_version < ATH10K_FW_WMI_OP_VERSION_10_4) >> >> > + ath10k_sta_update_stats_rx_duration(ar, &stats->peers); >> >> > + else >> >> > + ath10k_sta_update_extd_stats_rx_duration(ar, >> >> > + >> >> > &stats->peers_extd); >> >> > +} >> >> >> >> _Ideally_ wmi_op_version should be used only in ath10k_wmi_attach() and >> >> nowhere else. Isn't there any other way to detect this scenario? For >> >> example, what if you store stats_id to struct ath10k_fw_stats and do >> >> something like this: >> >> >> >> if (stats->stats_id & WMI_10_4_STAT_PEER_EXTD) >> >> ath10k_sta_update_extd_stats_rx_duration(ar, >> >> &stats->peers_extd); >> >> else >> >> ath10k_sta_update_stats_rx_duration(ar, &stats->peers); >> >> >> >> Would that work? >> > >> > [shafi] I am also thinking to re-use (ar->fw_stats_req_mask & >> > WMI_10_4_STAT_PEER_EXTD) >> > it might work, but will it conflict vdev stats WMI_STAT_VDEV (though its >> > not currently >> > supported for 10.2 ) >> >> Can you describe more how they conflict? > > [shafi] 'WMI_STAT_VDEV' and 'WMI_10_4_STAT_PEER_EXTD' are having the same > value > BIT(3), though as of now we are only 'WMI_10_4_STAT_PEER_EXTD' for 10.4
Ah. But that's easy to solve, for example you could use a bool instead. -- Kalle Valo _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k
