From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.2 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1iBeJ1-0000Xf-BT for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Sat, 21 Sep 2019 12:16:04 +0000 From: Kalle Valo Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/8] ath10k: enable RX bundle receive for sdio References: <1567679893-14029-1-git-send-email-wgong@codeaurora.org> <1567679893-14029-3-git-send-email-wgong@codeaurora.org> Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 15:15:58 +0300 In-Reply-To: <1567679893-14029-3-git-send-email-wgong@codeaurora.org> (Wen Gong's message of "Thu, 5 Sep 2019 18:38:07 +0800") Message-ID: <87r249alq9.fsf@codeaurora.org> 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: Wen Gong Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath10k@lists.infradead.org Wen Gong writes: > From: Alagu Sankar > > The existing implementation of initiating multiple sdio transfers for > receive bundling is slowing down the receive speed. Combining the > transfers using a bundle method would be ideal. > > The transmission utilization ratio for sdio bus for small packet is > slow, because the space and time cost for sdio bus is same for large > length packet and small length packet. So the speed of data for large > length packet is higher than small length. > > Test result of different length of data: > data packet(byte) cost time(us) calculated rate(Mbps) > 256 28 73 > 512 33 124 > 1024 35 234 > 1792 45 318 > 14336 168 682 > 28672 333 688 > 57344 660 695 > > Tested with QCA6174 SDIO with firmware > WLAN.RMH.4.4.1-00007-QCARMSWP-1. > > Signed-off-by: Alagu Sankar > Signed-off-by: Wen Gong [...] > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.c > @@ -24,6 +24,9 @@ > #include "trace.h" > #include "sdio.h" > > +#define ATH10K_SDIO_DMA_BUF_SIZE (32 * 1024) > +#define ATH10K_SDIO_VSG_BUF_SIZE (32 * 1024) Why two defines? Seems error prone to me and using the latter should be enough. > @@ -529,6 +532,7 @@ static int ath10k_sdio_mbox_rx_alloc(struct ath10k *ar, > size_t full_len, act_len; > bool last_in_bundle; > int ret, i; > + int pkt_cnt = 0; > > if (n_lookaheads > ATH10K_SDIO_MAX_RX_MSGS) { > ath10k_warn(ar, > @@ -572,20 +576,22 @@ static int ath10k_sdio_mbox_rx_alloc(struct ath10k *ar, > */ > size_t bndl_cnt; > > - ret = ath10k_sdio_mbox_alloc_pkt_bundle(ar, > - &ar_sdio->rx_pkts[i], > - htc_hdr, > - full_len, > - act_len, > - &bndl_cnt); > + struct ath10k_sdio_rx_data *rx_pkts = > + &ar_sdio->rx_pkts[pkt_cnt]; You need to declare rx_pkts in the beginning of the block, not mixed within the code. > @@ -606,9 +612,10 @@ static int ath10k_sdio_mbox_rx_alloc(struct ath10k *ar, > ath10k_warn(ar, "alloc_rx_pkt error %d\n", ret); > goto err; > } > + pkt_cnt++; Empty line before 'pkt_cnt++'. > -static int ath10k_sdio_mbox_rx_fetch(struct ath10k *ar) > +static int ath10k_sdio_mbox_rx_fetch_bundle(struct ath10k *ar) > { > struct ath10k_sdio *ar_sdio = ath10k_sdio_priv(ar); > + struct ath10k_sdio_rx_data *pkt; > + struct ath10k_htc_hdr *htc_hdr; > int ret, i; > + u32 pkt_offset, virt_pkt_len; > > + virt_pkt_len = 0; > for (i = 0; i < ar_sdio->n_rx_pkts; i++) { > - ret = ath10k_sdio_mbox_rx_packet(ar, > - &ar_sdio->rx_pkts[i]); > + virt_pkt_len += ar_sdio->rx_pkts[i].alloc_len; > + } > + > + if (virt_pkt_len < ATH10K_SDIO_DMA_BUF_SIZE) { > + ret = ath10k_sdio_readsb(ar, ar_sdio->mbox_info.htc_addr, > + ar_sdio->vsg_buffer, virt_pkt_len); > if (ret) > goto err; > + } else { > + ath10k_err(ar, "size exceeding limit %d\n", virt_pkt_len); > + ret = -ENOMEM; > + goto err; > + } Use common error handling style, ath10k_warn() and -E2BIG: if (virt_pkt_len >= ATH10K_SDIO_DMA_BUF_SIZE) { ath10k_err(ar, "size exceeding limit %d\n", virt_pkt_len); ret = -E2BIG; goto err; } ret = ath10k_sdio_readsb(ar, ar_sdio->mbox_info.htc_addr, ar_sdio->vsg_buffer, virt_pkt_len); if (ret) { ath10k_warn("failed to do foo: %d", ret) goto err; } > @@ -1123,7 +1151,7 @@ static int ath10k_sdio_bmi_get_rx_lookahead(struct ath10k *ar) > MBOX_HOST_INT_STATUS_ADDRESS, > &rx_word); > if (ret) { > - ath10k_warn(ar, "unable to read RX_LOOKAHEAD_VALID: %d\n", ret); > + ath10k_warn(ar, "unable to read rx_lookahd: %d\n", ret); Looks like an unnecessary change? > @@ -196,6 +196,9 @@ struct ath10k_sdio { > struct ath10k *ar; > struct ath10k_sdio_irq_data irq_data; > > + /* temporary buffer for sdio read */ > + u8 *vsg_buffer; So how is vsg_buffer protected? You should document that here. -- Kalle Valo _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k