On 20 July 2014 13:19, Michael Büsch <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 20 Jul 2014 13:00:21 +0200 > Rafał Miłecki <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +#define B43_PPR_CCK_RATES_NUM 4 >> +#define B43_PPR_OFDM_RATES_NUM 8 >> +#define B43_PPR_MCS_RATES_NUM 8 >> + >> +#define B43_PPR_RATES_NUM (B43_PPR_CCK_RATES_NUM + \ >> + B43_PPR_OFDM_RATES_NUM * 2 + \ >> + B43_PPR_MCS_RATES_NUM * 4) >> + >> +struct b43_ppr_rates { >> + u8 cck[B43_PPR_CCK_RATES_NUM]; >> + u8 ofdm[B43_PPR_OFDM_RATES_NUM]; >> + u8 ofdm_20_cdd[B43_PPR_OFDM_RATES_NUM]; >> + u8 mcs_20[B43_PPR_MCS_RATES_NUM]; /* SISO */ >> + u8 mcs_20_cdd[B43_PPR_MCS_RATES_NUM]; >> + u8 mcs_20_stbc[B43_PPR_MCS_RATES_NUM]; >> + u8 mcs_20_sdm[B43_PPR_MCS_RATES_NUM]; >> +} __packed; >> + >> +struct b43_ppr { >> + /* All powers are in qdbm (Q5.2) */ >> + union { >> + u8 __all_rates[B43_PPR_RATES_NUM]; >> + struct b43_ppr_rates rates; >> + } __packed; > > I don't think this union has to be packed. > And most likely struct b43_ppr_rates is ok without packing, too. > You could probably remove it there and add a BUILD_BUG which checks something > like (pseudocode): > BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct b43_ppr_rates.mcs_20_sdm) != > B43_PPR_CCK_RATES_NUM + B43_PPR_OFDM_RATES_NUM * 2 + B43_PPR_MCS_RATES_NUM * > 3); > > Removing packed will produce much nicer code.
Thanks for your comments. I'll rework this. John: please wait for V2 Btw. I was waiting for comments since Monday you slug (just kidding!) ;) -- Rafał _______________________________________________ b43-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/b43-dev
