From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E79333B6D1; Fri, 6 Mar 2026 09:07:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772788032; cv=none; b=Iep053brKJvEJcfZjVkIFNxl3XYZNm7KVdB1teh8B0bofwKKXMoHnKLj0GwCIUxzO1LbnCGSQoCxiXTIZghF35ZhORgIqbyz7OU3XyB41u58VniwE54QTxXH0THxCSFRSK073r/9aiGdzAHCZM42n/fl/y575eq897lE/H+LThI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772788032; c=relaxed/simple; bh=NBwbVilvUb4AHPANdxHrqDWuVkLIseBvlHc6oT/oIl0=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=Tl7Eq0sErJX2CoI/CkPSMKlJamhkbN6wjNiaa4Rkwsfh8/Qzp6TKmmIX3cfPLc57VQJGH0JhUZRWS2iRLQ+RHaP00tV3sIttD3xOJgjfkc73oOH5hcFVp6MlAAqKo+3FDKv0+r9p9biYH68beJK72RMi6jgbaTBwLv96g2hsJq8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=m/GZVrT1; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="m/GZVrT1" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=ThycKsEKWTTRPXuKgeYYjrxaMJPEIwjYvYV5WdtJgIM=; t=1772788029; x=1773997629; b=m/GZVrT13tLxV1Gp8/ki/75bR7He21/vH+pIaeXfbwhIybb 1DHNb/KnV9YdFSlpbTgoEJ4FtSpA6PZUMrmF5+vjTmApKQvuAk4EeLUiySGWoXgVaViqim9Cgwj32 RYUuWoovYxFGtzDj1WgqKs7IG/kt69QTumCwpvAc+LIJYG2O3NbrCDAkiyj2xeYvPtEn4iJfiuNdz N9zKxjpp8HyDnl+RgW0gYrgO67ea0jvqBRicQYyKJYuuNjm/swu++f366I/uiM5wKEkxqKwvzCoHx FJvw/luO/Uk4xc+u5fvwKgkHtLVoMzK8KI3/e7FPct3g6QkcrB589m1AvXLwjY8Q==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1vyR9H-0000000A0Ac-0RNk; Fri, 06 Mar 2026 10:07:07 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH wireless-next 17/35] wifi: mm81x: add mmrc.h From: Johannes Berg To: Lachlan Hodges , Dan Callaghan , Arien Judge Cc: ayman.grais@morsemicro.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2026 10:07:06 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20260227041108.66508-18-lachlan.hodges@morsemicro.com> (sfid-20260227_051337_652822_A8290BE6) References: <20260227041108.66508-1-lachlan.hodges@morsemicro.com> <20260227041108.66508-18-lachlan.hodges@morsemicro.com> (sfid-20260227_051337_652822_A8290BE6) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.58.3 (3.58.3-1.fc43) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Fri, 2026-02-27 at 15:10 +1100, Lachlan Hodges wrote: >=20 > +#define BIT_COUNT(_x) (hweight_long(_x)) Is that really worth having? > +/* Used to spehify supported features when initialising a STA */ > +#define MMRC_MASK(x) (1u << (x)) typo, but is that even better than BIT()? > +struct mmrc_sta_capabilities { > + u8 max_rates : 3; > + u8 max_retries : 3; > + u8 bandwidth : 5; > + u8 spatial_streams : 4; > + u16 rates : 11; > + u8 guard : 2; > + u8 sta_flags : 4; > + u8 sgi_per_bw : 5; I think this packs better if you use a bigger type? johannes