lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jul]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH V5 1/9] drivers core: Add support for Wifi band RF mitigations
Date
[AMD Official Use Only - General]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Horman <simon.horman@corigine.com>
> Sent: Friday, June 30, 2023 9:39 PM
> To: Quan, Evan <Evan.Quan@amd.com>
> Cc: rafael@kernel.org; lenb@kernel.org; Deucher, Alexander
> <Alexander.Deucher@amd.com>; Koenig, Christian
> <Christian.Koenig@amd.com>; Pan, Xinhui <Xinhui.Pan@amd.com>;
> airlied@gmail.com; daniel@ffwll.ch; johannes@sipsolutions.net;
> davem@davemloft.net; edumazet@google.com; kuba@kernel.org;
> pabeni@redhat.com; Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com>;
> mdaenzer@redhat.com; maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com;
> tzimmermann@suse.de; hdegoede@redhat.com; jingyuwang_vip@163.com;
> Lazar, Lijo <Lijo.Lazar@amd.com>; jim.cromie@gmail.com;
> bellosilicio@gmail.com; andrealmeid@igalia.com; trix@redhat.com;
> jsg@jsg.id.au; arnd@arndb.de; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-
> acpi@vger.kernel.org; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; dri-
> devel@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org;
> netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 1/9] drivers core: Add support for Wifi band RF
> mitigations
>
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 06:32:32PM +0800, Evan Quan wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > diff --git a/include/linux/wbrf.h b/include/linux/wbrf.h
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..3ca95786cef5
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/include/linux/wbrf.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
> > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> > +/*
> > + * Wifi Band Exclusion Interface
> > + * Copyright (C) 2023 Advanced Micro Devices
> > + */
> > +
> > +#ifndef _LINUX_WBRF_H
> > +#define _LINUX_WBRF_H
> > +
> > +#include <linux/device.h>
> > +
> > +/* Maximum number of wbrf ranges */
> > +#define MAX_NUM_OF_WBRF_RANGES 11
> > +
> > +struct exclusion_range {
> > + /* start and end point of the frequency range in Hz */
> > + uint64_t start;
> > + uint64_t end;
> > +};
> > +
> > +struct exclusion_range_pool {
> > + struct exclusion_range band_list[MAX_NUM_OF_WBRF_RANGES];
> > + uint64_t
> ref_counter[MAX_NUM_OF_WBRF_RANGES];
> > +};
> > +
> > +struct wbrf_ranges_in {
> > + /* valid entry: `start` and `end` filled with non-zero values */
> > + struct exclusion_range band_list[MAX_NUM_OF_WBRF_RANGES];
> > +};
> > +
> > +struct wbrf_ranges_out {
> > + uint32_t num_of_ranges;
> > + struct exclusion_range band_list[MAX_NUM_OF_WBRF_RANGES];
> > +} __packed;
> > +
> > +enum wbrf_notifier_actions {
> > + WBRF_CHANGED,
> > +};
>
> Hi Evan,
>
> checkpatch suggests that u64 and u32 might be more appropriate types here,
> as they are Kernel types, whereas the ones use are user-space types.
Thanks for pointing this out. Will update them accordingly.

Evan
>
> ...

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-07-04 05:42    [W:0.901 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site