> Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2015-06-25 at 03:48 +0000, David Lin wrote: > > Signed-off-by: David Lin <d...@marvell.com> > > This really needs a commit message, like saying what chips it supports, > perhaps where to find them, and similar. > O.K. We will add it. > > > drivers/net/wireless/Kconfig | 1 + > > drivers/net/wireless/Makefile | 2 + > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/Kconfig | 17 + > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/Makefile | 9 + > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/dev.h | 435 ++++++ > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/fwcmd.c | 2328 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/fwcmd.h | 175 +++ > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/fwdl.c | 183 +++ > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/fwdl.h | 27 + > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/hostcmd.h | 753 ++++++++++ > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/isr.c | 148 ++ > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/isr.h | 26 + > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/mac80211.c | 743 ++++++++++ > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/mac80211.h | 25 + > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/main.c | 858 ++++++++++++ > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/rx.c | 523 +++++++ > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/rx.h | 25 + > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/sysadpt.h | 67 + > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/tx.c | 836 +++++++++++ > > drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/tx.h | 28 + > > 20 files changed, 7209 insertions(+) > > You're missing a MAINTAINERS entry. > We will add it. > > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/Kconfig > > @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ > > +config MWLWIFI > > + tristate "Marvell Wireless WiFi driver (mwlwifi)" > > + depends on PCI && MAC80211 && MWIFIEX_PCIE=n > > Uh, what's with the exclusion of MWIFIEX_PCIE? Couldn't use a different PCI > ID? > I really think you need to get rid of this, otherwise people can't even > *build-test* their wifi changes fully. > Both the drivers are operable for the same chip part number 8897 and its modules (boards) manufactured out there. The PCI Device ID is a fixed value (by chip/manufacturer) on those modules. As said earlier, the two drivers are for mac80211 host mac, and firmware mac respectively. They serve different purposes. Users need to choose which driver they want to use for the same wifi hardware, and they cannot use both of them at the same time. The mwifiex is more widely used now and sta centric. We do not want to break it.
I am not sure but I believe they are also multiple flavors of driver for some other chips. Any advice how they are handled, considering that changing the hardware/board is not an option? I guess we want the community to be better served using the same hardware. Opinion from others are welcomed. > > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/mwlwifi/Makefile > > @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ > > +obj-$(CONFIG_MWLWIFI) += mwlwifi.o > > + > > +mwlwifi-objs += main.o > > +mwlwifi-objs += mac80211.o > > +mwlwifi-objs += fwdl.o > > +mwlwifi-objs += fwcmd.o > > +mwlwifi-objs += tx.o > > +mwlwifi-objs += rx.o > > +mwlwifi-objs += isr.o > > Please add > > ccflags-y += -D__CHECK_ENDIAN__ > > to this file to always flag sparse errors. You have checked with sparse, > right? > > Ok ... you clearly haven't. Please add the line above, and fix up the results. > Also, you really need to try building this driver on 64-bit, it reports a good > number of warnings. > > If you're up to it, also try running smatch on it, it reports a number of more > warnings that sparse misses, like this one: > > > mwl_rx_ring_init() warn: variable dereferenced before check > 'rx_hndl->psk_buff' (see line 108) > Although "-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__" does not put into Makefile, I had used "C=2 CF="-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__" to check warnings for endian and remove these warnings. If you think we need to add this to Makefile and make sure zero warning messages, we will do that (only for sparser). BTW, is it possible for you to give us all your comments based on this patch? So we can include these modifications in PATCH v4. Thanks. > > This is going to be only a very superficial review until the driver builds > cleanly. > I do think the firmware API stuff I was concerned about earlier looks better > now though > > I think you went a bit overbaord with wiphy_info(), a number of those (like > the > beacon info one) surely are more debug messages than operational messages > that should be shown all the time. > > > > +> > /* Info for debugging > > +> > */ > > +> > wiphy_info(hw->wiphy, "%s ...", __func__); > > +> > wiphy_info(hw->wiphy, " -->pPhysTxRing[0] = %x", > > +> > > priv->desc_data[0].pphys_tx_ring); > > +> > wiphy_info(hw->wiphy, " -->pPhysTxRing[1] = %x", > > +> > > priv->desc_data[1].pphys_tx_ring); > > +> > wiphy_info(hw->wiphy, " -->pPhysTxRing[2] = %x", > > +> > > priv->desc_data[2].pphys_tx_ring); > > +> > wiphy_info(hw->wiphy, " -->pPhysTxRing[3] = %x", > > +> > > priv->desc_data[3].pphys_tx_ring); > > +> > wiphy_info(hw->wiphy, " -->pPhysRxRing = %x", > > +> > > priv->desc_data[0].pphys_rx_ring); > > +> > wiphy_info(hw->wiphy, " -->numtxq %d wcbperq %d totalrxwcb > %d", > > +> > > SYSADPT_NUM_OF_DESC_DATA, > > +> > > SYSADPT_MAX_NUM_TX_DESC, > > +> > > SYSADPT_MAX_NUM_RX_DESC); > > Like that ... I've even read the comment :) > We will modify it. > > > +> > spin_lock_irqsave(&priv->fwcmd_lock, flags) > > > > You really only need _irqsave on the stream_lock, the others aren't used in > IRQ context so don't need to disable IRQs. Perhaps BHs, haven't checked. > We will modify it. > > Johannes > Thanks, David
