From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-wm1-x343.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::343]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jxwdg-0006yD-Pf for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:05:17 +0000 Received: by mail-wm1-x343.google.com with SMTP id o8so3698871wmh.4 for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 11:05:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [RFC 0/7] Add support to process rx packets in thread References: <1595351666-28193-1-git-send-email-pillair@codeaurora.org> <20200721172514.GT1339445@lunn.ch> From: Florian Fainelli Message-ID: Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 11:05:03 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200721172514.GT1339445@lunn.ch> Content-Language: en-US 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: Andrew Lunn , Rakesh Pillai Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ath10k@lists.infradead.org, dianders@chromium.org, evgreen@chromium.org, kuba@kernel.org, johannes@sipsolutions.net, davem@davemloft.net, kvalo@codeaurora.org On 7/21/20 10:25 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 10:44:19PM +0530, Rakesh Pillai wrote: >> NAPI gets scheduled on the CPU core which got the >> interrupt. The linux scheduler cannot move it to a >> different core, even if the CPU on which NAPI is running >> is heavily loaded. This can lead to degraded wifi >> performance when running traffic at peak data rates. >> >> A thread on the other hand can be moved to different >> CPU cores, if the one on which its running is heavily >> loaded. During high incoming data traffic, this gives >> better performance, since the thread can be moved to a >> less loaded or sometimes even a more powerful CPU core >> to account for the required CPU performance in order >> to process the incoming packets. >> >> This patch series adds the support to use a high priority >> thread to process the incoming packets, as opposed to >> everything being done in NAPI context. > > I don't see why this problem is limited to the ath10k driver. I expect > it applies to all drivers using NAPI. So shouldn't you be solving this > in the NAPI core? Allow a driver to request the NAPI core uses a > thread? What's more, you should be able to configure interrupt affinity to steer RX processing onto a desired CPU core, is not that working for you somehow? -- Florian _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k