From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1X9ewz-0003zV-V2 for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 18:38:10 +0000 From: Kalle Valo Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ath10k: fix Rx aggregation reordering References: <1405505855-13741-1-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com> <1405509540-32691-1-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 21:37:29 +0300 In-Reply-To: <1405509540-32691-1-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com> (Michal Kazior's message of "Wed, 16 Jul 2014 13:19:00 +0200") Message-ID: <87r41dtf2u.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: Michal Kazior Cc: ath10k@lists.infradead.org, Denton Gentry (dropping linux-wireless) Michal Kazior writes: > Firmware doesn't perform Rx reordering so it is > left to the host driver to do that. > > Use mac80211 to perform reordering instead of > re-inventing the wheel. > > This fixes TCP throughput issues in some > environments. > > Reported-by: Denton Gentry > Signed-off-by: Michal Kazior > --- > This depends on: > > * mac80211: fix Rx reordering with RX_FLAG_AMSDU_MORE > * mac80211: add support for Rx reordering offloading > > I'm still seeing some issues with TCP traffic. > Apparently firmware/hardware sometimes stalls Rx > for ~100ms and misses some aggregate frames. I > wasn't able to pinpoint what the problem is. The > more parallel TCP streams (iperf) the more often > stalls happen. UDP doesn't seem to trigger the Rx > stalls at all. The mac80211 patches are in mac80211-next, but I can only apply this one only once they are in wireless-next. Also the other thing is that 3.17 merge window is very close. I might be able to squeeze this in but there's the risk that this patch hasn't received enough testing from being in ath.git. How safe (or risky) is this patch? If we push this to 3.17, we could try to fix regressions in -rc releases but that's always more difficult than waiting for 3.18. -- Kalle Valo _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k