Each device has only one reserved page shared with all of the
vifs, so it seems not reasonable to pass vif as one of the
arguments to rtw_fw_download_rsvd_page(). If driver is going
to run more than one vif, the content of reserved page could
not be built for all of the vifs.

To fix it, let each vif maintain its own reserved page list,
and build the final reserved page to download to the firmware
from all of the vifs. Hence driver should add reserved pages
to each vif according to the vif->type when adding the vif.

For station mode, add reserved page with rtw_add_rsvd_page_sta().
If the station mode is going to suspend in PNO (net-detect)
mode, remove the reserved pages used for normal mode, and add
new one for wowlan mode with rtw_add_rsvd_page_pno().

For beacon mode, only beacon is required to be added using
rtw_add_rsvd_page_bcn().

This would make the code flow simpler as we don't need to
add reserved pages when vif is running, just add/remove them
when ieee80211_ops::[add|remove]_interface.

When driver is going to download the reserved page, it will
collect pages from all of the vifs, this list is maintained
by rtwdev, with build_list as the pages' member. That way, we
can still build a list of reserved pages to be downloaded.
Also we can get the location of the pages from the list that
is maintained by rtwdev.

The biggest problem is that the first page should always be
beacon, if other type of reserved page is put in the first
page, the tx descriptor and offset could be wrong.
But station mode vif does not add beacon into its list, so
we need to add a dummy page in front of the list, to make
sure other pages will not be put in the first page. As the
dummy page is allocated when building the list, we must free
it before building a new list of reserved pages to firmware.
Signed-off-by: NYan-Hsuan Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200312080852.16684-4-yhchuang@realtek.com

Extract skb allocation routines for rsvd_page and h2c.
These routines should also be used by USB and SDIO.

This should not change the logic at all.
memset() for pkt_info is unnecessary, just declare as {0}.
Also skb_put()/memcpy() can be replaced by skb_put_data().
Signed-off-by: NYan-Hsuan Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200312080852.16684-3-yhchuang@realtek.com

This driver generally only needs to ensure that
(a) it doesn't try to process TX interrupts at the same time as
    power-save operations (and similar)
(b) the device interrupt gets disabled while we're still handling the
    last set of interrupts

For (a), all the operations (e.g., PS transitions, packet handling)
happens in non-atomic contexts (e.g., threaded IRQ).

For (b), we only need mutual exclusion for brief sections (i.e., while
we're actually manipulating the interrupt mask/status).

So, we can introduce a separate lock for handling (b), disabling IRQs
while we do it. For (a), we can demote the locking to BH only, now that
(b) (the only steps done in atomic context) and that has its own lock.

This helps reduce the amount of time this driver spends with IRQs off.
Notably, transitioning out of power-save modes can take >3 milliseconds,
and this transition is done under the protection of 'irq_lock'.
Signed-off-by: NBrian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: NYan-Hsuan Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200312080852.16684-2-yhchuang@realtek.com

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200319230617.GA15035@embeddedor.com

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200319230525.GA14835@embeddedor.com

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200319225133.GA29672@embeddedor.com

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200319225002.GA28673@embeddedor.com

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200305111401.GA25126@embeddedor

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200305111216.GA24982@embeddedor

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Acked-by: NArend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200225020804.GA9428@embeddedor

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Acked-by: NGanapathi Bhat <ganapathi.bhat@nxp.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200225020413.GA8057@embeddedor

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200225011846.GA2773@embeddedor

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200225011709.GA601@embeddedor

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200225011415.GA31868@embeddedor

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200225011151.GA30675@embeddedor

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200225003408.GA28675@embeddedor

The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language
extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare
variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2],
introduced in C99:

struct foo {
        int stuff;
        struct boo array[];
};

By making use of the mechanism above, we will get a compiler warning
in case the flexible array does not occur last in the structure, which
will help us prevent some kind of undefined behavior bugs from being
inadvertently introduced[3] to the codebase from now on.

Also, notice that, dynamic memory allocations won't be affected by
this change:

"Flexible array members have incomplete type, and so the sizeof operator
may not be applied. As a quirk of the original implementation of
zero-length arrays, sizeof evaluates to zero."[1]

This issue was found with the help of Coccinelle.

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
[2] https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/21
[3] commit 76497732 ("cxgb3/l2t: Fix undefined behaviour")
Signed-off-by: NGustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Signed-off-by: NKalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200225002746.GA26789@embeddedor

Merge tag 'iwlwifi-next-for-kalle-2020-03-17' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/iwlwifi/iwlwifi-next

First set of iwlwifi patches intended for v5.7

* Refactoring of the device selection algorithms;

mt76 patches for 5.7

* MT7663 support for the MT7615 driver
* USB fixes
* DBDC fixes for MT7615
* MT76x02 watchdog fixes
* Injection fix for MT7615
* Sensitivity fix for MT7615
* MCU support code cleanup

Move the AX200 devices to the new table and add the appropriate cfg
struct and strings.
Signed-off-by: NLuca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/iwlwifi.20200309091348.fdfa5f31b8b1.Idfd28829d9f3820de06d3bba8fa66048b8d0d0b0@changeid

These entries are decided at runtime using the new parameters now, so
they are not needed in the macro that is reused in the configs.
Signed-off-by: NLuca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/iwlwifi.20200309091348.3387a6c8fdbe.I98284457f26c5695754964b28f0257a7dc7c6b1c@changeid

These devices can now also be fully differentiated by using the new
parameters.  Move them all to the new table format.
Signed-off-by: NLuca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/iwlwifi.20200309091348.11c65d195677.I8faf50b325282df4892520a3b21fbdedabbb64f0@changeid

All the pu devices can now be differentiated using the new
parameters, so move them all to the new tables accordingly.

This also includes removal of a few deprecated IDs and redundant cfg
structs.
Signed-off-by: NLuca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/iwlwifi.20200309091348.e7dc61e665f3.I44dcf9195bb8cc9e8c8e3e87182e9185c819a99d@changeid

These devices don't exist anymore, so remove them from the tables.
Signed-off-by: NLuca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/iwlwifi.20200309091348.fef62aa45887.I302e32b7cfff7da0d920547fae60ad9f2296e052@changeid

The 9260-1x1 device can be differentiated using the PCI device ID.
There is a single occurrence of this device, so continue relying on
the device and subsystem device IDs.

The name of this device was incorrect, so add a new string
specifically for it.
Signed-off-by: NLuca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/iwlwifi.20200309091348.4d74e1be7cac.Id27bd9c878b73cb771691cbe6082fd40e079b44d@changeid

TH1 devices can now be fully differentiated by using the device
parameters we have (particularly the RF_TYPE).  Start using these
parameters instead of hardcoding to specific subsystem device IDs.

This also fixes the name of one of the TH1 devices that was
erroneously using the 9260 struct and renames 9160 to 9162.
Signed-off-by: NLuca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/iwlwifi.20200309091348.18d4304b5454.Ib168d186da88393e9ec46f0fca523edb48d9138e@changeid

These devices can be differentiated depending on the RF type and RF
ID.  Change them to use these instead of relying on the subsystem
device IDs.

This also fixes some names that were not including 160MHz (as they
should).
Signed-off-by: NLuca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/iwlwifi.20200309091348.345de1efb3ec.Ib9221027a955188ea7c1ffca8a45bccd6c1e6a13@changeid

Pu, PnJ and Th devices have different combinations of PCI ID, MAC ID
and RF IDs.  Use these to differentiate them and choose the correct
configuration.

This also includes a change from using soc cfg's for 0x2526
devices (PnJ/Th), which was incorrect.
Signed-off-by: NLuca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/iwlwifi.20200309091348.602bb33528cf.I3acacb07c69ed063c7f1ca78f2dce9b7b4ef3946@changeid

Devices that also include a GNSS module have different names, so add a
new device option to differentiate them, according to the values we
have in the modules section of the subsystem device ID.

Additionally, convert the two applicable devices to use this value
instead of hardcoded subsystem IDs.
Signed-off-by: NLuca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/iwlwifi.20200309091348.1f958e558d05.I45492bb57cbbeb4cc0ec84313bade4def7377a27@changeid

Add MAC ID, RF ID and the bit that tells us whether the device can
handle 160MHz bandwidth to the device struct.

This allows us to chose the correct structure and string depending on
these parameters.  Do so for all the 0x2526 devices we already moved
to the new table.
Signed-off-by: NLuca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/iwlwifi.20200309091348.a6bef6ee8fe1.I01f7a6f49aa60d2d61633a8a8b859015681eac5b@changeid

All the 0x2526 devices are now in the new table, so we can start
reusing configurations and adding the strings independently to all of
them, reusing them when possible.
Signed-off-by: NLuca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/iwlwifi.20200309091348.88e3d47c42a8.I1bd37ae0d0f9f79732f03badf84d7d063993b73e@changeid

Now that we have the strings separate from the rest, we can move the
remaining 0x2526 devices to the new table in preparation to reuse the
configs.
Signed-off-by: NLuca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/iwlwifi.20200309091348.a7998f8d7507.I4be8776edb8c30416efc184c66f11add5eed06de@changeid

Introduce support for mt7663e 802.11ac 2x2:2 chipset to mt7615 driver.
Co-developed-by: NSean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>
Signed-off-by: NSean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>
Co-developed-by: NRyder Lee <ryder.lee@mediatek.com>
Signed-off-by: NRyder Lee <ryder.lee@mediatek.com>
Signed-off-by: NLorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NFelix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>

Sobstitute sta_rec_wtbl data structure with tlv one
Signed-off-by: NLorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NFelix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>

Introduce mt7615_mcu_uni_set_ba routine in order to add support
for mt7663e driver
Co-developed-by: NSean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>
Signed-off-by: NSean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>
Signed-off-by: NLorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NFelix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>

Introduce mt7615_mcu_uni_set_bss, mt7615_mcu_uni_set_dev and
mt7615_mcu_uni_set_beacon_offload uni mcu commands. This is a
preliminary patch to add mt7663e support
Signed-off-by: NSean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>
Co-developed-by: NLorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NLorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NFelix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>

Introduce mt7615_mcu_uni_set_bmc and mt7615_mcu_uni_set_sta routines for
mt7663e commands.
Co-developed-by: NSean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>
Signed-off-by: NSean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>
Signed-off-by: NLorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NFelix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>

Introduce mcu uni command type. Uni commands rely on a stripped verions
of mt7615_mcu_txd data strutture. Split mt7615_mcu_txd_common and
mt7615_mcu_txd. Uni commands will be use by mt7663e driver
Co-developed-by: NSean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>
Signed-off-by: NSean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>
Signed-off-by: NLorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NFelix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>

Introduce mt7615_init_mac_chain routine to configure per band mac
register since new devices (e.g. mt7663e) do not support dbdc
Signed-off-by: NLorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NFelix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>

Introduce mt7615_eeprom_parse_hw_band_cap routine in order to configure
supported band for mt7663e and mt7622 devices since they do not rely on
eeprom data to enable 2GHz/5GHz bands
Signed-off-by: NLorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NFelix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>