From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Stuge Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 04:30:47 +0200 Subject: [ath9k-devel] Performance problems with the AR9287 In-Reply-To: References: <20111020020229.11195.qmail@stuge.se> Message-ID: <20111020023047.31941.qmail@stuge.se> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org Mitch Davis wrote: > > I disagree strongly. I would not at all expect that simply finding a > > commit which exposes broken behavior will result in a fix. .. > I thought so, and I agree. This particular problem could have been > broken and fixed many times, and the odds of me finding the > relevant one isn't good. On the other hand, maybe the bisect is easy enough to do, and it *might* be enough to identify the problem. > > You basically have to find the problem on your own. > > Can you recommend a basic approach? I'm afraid not. I'm also not an ath9k developer. If I would have the same issues I expect I would spend a week or so on studying the driver code and trying to reverse engineer the hardware. > Are Adrian's comments about the entries in debugfs useful? Yes! > What should I be looking for? I really don't know. Apparently the driver code quality is now good, and there are no issues. I'm really happy that I haven't had to use it for a while; issues that I might have run into together with sad state of affairs on this mailing list would just make me too mad. //Peter