All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>
To: Wey-Yi Guy <wey-yi.w.guy@intel.com>
Cc: linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	ipw3945-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] iwlagn: need longer tx queue stuck timer for coex devices
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 18:44:48 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101015164447.GB4286@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1287079370-20587-2-git-send-email-wey-yi.w.guy@intel.com>

Wey,

On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 11:02:42AM -0700, Wey-Yi Guy wrote:
> For BT/WiFi combo devices, need longer tx stuck queue
> timer, so those devices won't reload firmware too often.

Seeing how many tweaking queue hung monitoring we need, I started
to think that the watchdog design is not so good. Currently we compare 
q->read_ptr with q->last_read_ptr, and if they match 3 times in a row
during 200ms, we assume firmware hung. But maybe 200ms of no read_ptr
activity is too small time for device. Moreover we have unlikely but
possible situation when device is fully functional, but read_ptr will
wrap by accident to q->last_read_ptr on every check.

I think, better solution would be something like in rt2x00 or in 
net/sched/sch_generic.c (however rt2x00 is easier to understand). It is
based on time stamp. When we get tx complete notification from hardware
(and incise read_ptr) mark the time stamp. In watchdog, which tick
periodically, check if queue is not empty and if current time is
bigger than time_stamp + time_out, if it is - firmware hung. More
smaller watchog tick give more precise hung detect (with disadvantage
of more cpu usage).

Stanislaw

  reply	other threads:[~2010-10-15 16:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-10-14 18:02 [PATCH 0/9] update for 2.6.37 Wey-Yi Guy
2010-10-14 18:02 ` [PATCH 1/9] iwlagn: need longer tx queue stuck timer for coex devices Wey-Yi Guy
2010-10-15 16:44   ` Stanislaw Gruszka [this message]
2010-10-15 18:01     ` Guy, Wey-Yi W
2010-10-18 12:12       ` Stanislaw Gruszka
2010-10-18 14:16         ` Guy, Wey-Yi
2010-10-14 18:02 ` [PATCH 2/9] iwlwifi: allow probe-after-rx on 2.4 GHz Wey-Yi Guy
2010-10-14 18:02 ` [PATCH 3/9] iwlwifi: rename ibss_beacon variable Wey-Yi Guy
2010-10-14 18:02 ` [PATCH 4/9] iwlwifi: clean up some beacon handling Wey-Yi Guy
2010-10-14 18:02 ` [PATCH 5/9] iwlagn: 6050 ops should be used; Wey-Yi Guy
2010-10-14 18:02 ` [PATCH 6/9] iwlwifi: rewrite RXON checks Wey-Yi Guy
2010-10-14 18:02 ` [PATCH 7/9] iwlwifi: blink LED in IBSS mode Wey-Yi Guy
2010-10-14 18:02 ` [PATCH 8/9] iwlagn: check beacon frame size Wey-Yi Guy
2010-10-14 18:02 ` [PATCH 9/9] iwlwifi: move agn only eeprom functions to separate file Wey-Yi Guy

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20101015164447.GB4286@redhat.com \
    --to=sgruszka@redhat.com \
    --cc=ipw3945-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=wey-yi.w.guy@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.