All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>
To: Kim Wooseok <5mghybrid@khu.ac.kr>
Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Jes Sorensen" <Jes.Sorensen@gmail.com>,
	Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH rtw-next v3 3/3] wifi: rtl8xxxu: preserve RX requests across recoverable transfer errors
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2026 00:24:47 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8d8e60e260254dc2a2cc1f37cd1b3832@realtek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAH1Bc_yTizX4Cex+GRLeRUtaBdp8jEc2XEyawMzkQsZFpj1QGw@mail.gmail.com>

Kim Wooseok <5mghybrid@khu.ac.kr> wrote:
> > Not prefer using bare system_wq.
> > Can both use schedule_delayed_work()?
> 
> In v3, the error path uses queue_delayed_work(system_wq, ..., delay),
> while normal completions use mod_delayed_work(system_wq, ..., 0).
> 
> I can replace the error-path call with schedule_delayed_work().
> However, the normal-completion path is intended to bring an existing
> delayed retry forward when the pending count exceeds the batching
> threshold, which schedule_delayed_work(..., 0) cannot do because it
> leaves an already pending timer unchanged.

I knew this point. Does it matter to schedule a normal case immediately
after an error case (defer to schedule) happened within 100ms?
(Just an open question)

> 
> Would it be OK to retain mod_delayed_work() for normal completions,
> changing its queue argument to system_percpu_wq?

OK if above question is yes. 

Or both change to use mod_delayed_work()?

> 
> With that change, schedule_delayed_work() would select system_percpu_wq
> internally, and mod_delayed_work() would use the same queue explicitly.
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2026-09-21  0:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-19 20:44 [PATCH rtw-next v3 0/3] wifi: rtl8xxxu: keep RX requests available across transient errors Kim Wooseok via B4 Relay
2026-09-19 20:44 ` Kim Wooseok
2026-09-19 20:44 ` [PATCH rtw-next v3 1/3] wifi: rtl8xxxu: free RX skb when URB submission fails Kim Wooseok via B4 Relay
2026-09-19 20:44   ` Kim Wooseok
2026-09-19 20:44 ` [PATCH rtw-next v3 2/3] wifi: rtl8xxxu: unwind incomplete receive startup Kim Wooseok via B4 Relay
2026-09-19 20:44   ` Kim Wooseok
2026-09-20  3:26   ` Ping-Ke Shih
2026-09-20  8:17     ` Kim Wooseok
2026-09-19 20:44 ` [PATCH rtw-next v3 3/3] wifi: rtl8xxxu: preserve RX requests across recoverable transfer errors Kim Wooseok via B4 Relay
2026-09-19 20:44   ` Kim Wooseok
2026-09-20  3:46   ` Ping-Ke Shih
2026-09-20  8:17     ` Kim Wooseok
2026-09-21  0:24       ` Ping-Ke Shih [this message]
2026-09-21  7:58         ` Kim Wooseok

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=8d8e60e260254dc2a2cc1f37cd1b3832@realtek.com \
    --to=pkshih@realtek.com \
    --cc=5mghybrid@khu.ac.kr \
    --cc=Jes.Sorensen@gmail.com \
    --cc=kvalo@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.