[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251029200210-5906e044da5941522130c159-pchelkin@ispras>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 20:09:23 +0300
From: Fedor Pchelkin <pchelkin@...ras.ru>
To: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@...ltek.com>
Cc: Bitterblue Smith <rtl8821cerfe2@...il.com>, 
	Zong-Zhe Yang <kevin_yang@...ltek.com>, Bernie Huang <phhuang@...ltek.com>, 
	"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"lvc-project@...uxtesting.org" <lvc-project@...uxtesting.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rtw-next v3 7/9] wifi: rtw89: handle
 IEEE80211_TX_CTL_REQ_TX_STATUS frames for USB
On Mon, 27. Oct 01:14, Ping-Ke Shih wrote:
> Fedor Pchelkin <pchelkin@...ras.ru> wrote:
> > On Wed, 22. Oct 07:16, Ping-Ke Shih wrote:
> > > Fedor Pchelkin <pchelkin@...ras.ru> wrote:
> > > > @@ -5849,6 +5852,7 @@ int rtw89_core_init(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev)
> > > >         wiphy_work_init(&rtwdev->cancel_6ghz_probe_work, rtw89_cancel_6ghz_probe_work);
> > > >         INIT_WORK(&rtwdev->load_firmware_work, rtw89_load_firmware_work);
> > > >
> > > > +       skb_queue_head_init(&rtwdev->tx_rpt.queue);
> > >
> > > not sure if it's worth to initialize tx_rpt.sn to zero?
> > 
> > That shouldn't be needed because rtwdev is zero initialized in
> > rtw89_alloc_ieee80211_hw().  ieee80211_alloc_hw() fills the private
> > driver part with zeroes.
> 
> Ah. I mentioned this in wrong place. I meant that we can initialize tx_rpt.sn
> in rtw89_core_start() or do it right after downloading firmware in
> __rtw89_fw_download() like ' fw_info->h2c_seq = 0;'.
To my mind, it's not worth adding extra code to initialize tx_rpt.sn to
zero at some point as it's just a sequential number in [0x0, 0xF] range,
which is replayed to firmware and used to synchronize with it.  Actually
we can start counting from 0x1 or 0xA, it doesn't really matter to care
about counter initialization.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
 
