From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-lf1-x144.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::144]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1h9mEj-0005xY-EG for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 07:47:38 +0000 Received: by mail-lf1-x144.google.com with SMTP id g7so758252lfh.10 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 00:47:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: remove iteration in wake_tx_queue References: <20190327162906.6010-1-erik.stromdahl@gmail.com> From: Erik Stromdahl Message-ID: Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 08:47:33 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: Peter Oh , "kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "ath10k@lists.infradead.org" Cc: "yiboz@codeaurora.org" On 3/27/19 6:49 PM, Peter Oh wrote: > > > On 03/27/2019 09:29 AM, Erik Stromdahl wrote: >> Iterating the TX queue and thereby dequeuing all available packets in the >> queue could result in performance penalties on some SMP systems. >> > Please share the test results and numbers you've run to help others > thoughts. > I haven't run any tests with ath10k PCIe, but Yibo Zhao had noticed a 10% degradation without this patch. Yibo: Can you provide iperf results etc. that shows the performance gain? -- Erik _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k