Re: [PATCH rtw-next v7 4/6] wifi: rtw88: 8723b: add the RTL8723B chip driver

[Luka Gejak]

October 6, 2026 at 07:29, "Ping-Ke Shih" <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx mailto:pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx?to=%22Ping-Ke%20Shih%22%20%3Cpkshih%40realtek.com%3E > wrote:


> 
> Luka Gejak <luka.gejak@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > >
> >  > However, including rtw8703b.h from another chip driver is
> >  > already established, rtw8723cs.c includes it to reuse rtw8703b_hw_spec.
> >  >
> >  As I know, 8723CS and 8723B are mutual alias, no?
> >  
> >  As far as I know, they are not. They are different chips.
> > 
> fix typo.
> 
> 8723CS and 8703B are mutual alias, no?
> 

Possibly, but either way I will move, so it shared.

> > 
> > >
> >  > +/*
> >  > + * Row 20 (-6.0 dB) intentionally does not match the v5.2.17 vendor driver,
> >  >
> >  > I really don't want to mention vendor driver here. If you really need it,
> >  > mention it in commit message or cover-letter.
> >  >
> >  > + * which has 0x1c, 0x1a, 0x18, 0x12, 0x0e, 0x08 there. Every other row agrees.
> >  > + * The values below are what rtl8723be, the mainline driver for this same
> >  > + * chip, uses at the same index, and they are also what the vendor's own
> >  > + * cck_swing_table_ch1_ch13_92e and the staging rtl8723bs driver use. They
> >  > + * also track the 0.5 dB step of the surrounding rows: against row 32 as 0 dB,
> >  > + * 0x1b is within 0.06 of the ideal -6.0 dB value while 0x1c is 0.94 away,
> >  > + * the largest error anywhere in the table. Treat the vendor row as the
> >  > + * anomaly and do not "fix" this towards it.
> >  >
> >  > And you have comments each row. Is it still need this block comment to explain?
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > I agree, will drop vendor reference and block comment.
> >  >
> >  I'm not sure if LLM writes this? LLM always write verbose comments for
> >  each line it added. Just ask LLM to write self-explained code.
> >  
> >  No, I wrote it because only 1 row differs from vendor driver and I
> >  thought I should mention it.
> > 
> No worries. Just remove them.
> 
> > 
> > >
> >  > So I would
> >  > prefer to leave both tables as they are. If you want the unused fields listed as dummies
> >  > to pin the order, I can add them, but the sequence itself would not change.
> >  >
> >  I will think a bit how to align these messed tables.
> >  
> >  I understand. I am gonna send v8 today, and do you think that v8 could
> >  be merged, so driver lands in 7.4 release?
> > 
> I think only minor changes are needed, it is possible to get merged into 7.4
> The messed tables can be ignored for now. 

You made few minor comments on rtw8723b.c which I addressed in v8.

Best regards,
Luka Gejak