Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] staging: vt6656: Refactor the assignment of the phy->signal variable | From | Malcolm Priestley <> | Date | Fri, 10 Apr 2020 17:40:52 +0100 |
| |
On 10/04/2020 16:59, Oscar Carter wrote: > On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 04:37:59PM +0100, Malcolm Priestley wrote: >> >> >> On 10/04/2020 12:28, Oscar Carter wrote: >>> Create a constant array with the values of the "phy->signal" for every >>> rate. Remove all "phy->signal" assignments inside the switch statement >>> and replace these with a single reading from the new vnt_phy_signal >>> array. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Oscar Carter <oscar.carter@gmx.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c | 101 +++++++----------------------- >>> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 80 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c >>> index a19a563d8bcc..47f93bf6e07b 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c >>> +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c >>> @@ -115,6 +115,21 @@ static const u16 vnt_frame_time[MAX_RATE] = { >>> 10, 20, 55, 110, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, 144, 192, 216 >>> }; >> >> Actually you don't need the second values > > Great. >>> >>> +static const u8 vnt_phy_signal[][2] = { >>> + {0x00, 0x00}, /* RATE_1M */ >> The driver would never attempt use preamble at this rate >> so it's safe to include in with the next 3 rates Sorry got this wrong the driver is trying to do preamble (short) at this rate and it is not working.
So don't apply it to RATE_1M rate.
Regards
Malcolm
| |