public inbox for ath12k@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lingbo Kong <quic_lingbok@quicinc.com>
To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>
Cc: <ath12k@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] wifi: ath12k: report station mode transmit rate
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 14:31:31 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4fdfdb34-7892-4bf9-8da1-e09cf6ff7731@quicinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87v844qsih.fsf@kernel.org>



On 2024/4/26 19:21, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Lingbo Kong <quic_lingbok@quicinc.com> writes:
> 
>> On 2024/4/26 0:54, Kalle Valo wrote:
>>> Lingbo Kong <quic_lingbok@quicinc.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> +static void ath12k_dp_tx_update_txcompl(struct ath12k *ar, struct
>>>> hal_tx_status *ts)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct ath12k_base *ab = ar->ab;
>>>> +	struct ath12k_peer *peer;
>>>> +	struct ath12k_sta *arsta;
>>>> +	struct ieee80211_sta *sta;
>>>> +	u16 rate;
>>>> +	u8 rate_idx = 0;
>>>> +	int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> +	spin_lock_bh(&ab->base_lock);
>>>
>>> Did you analyse how this function, and especially taking the
>>> base_lock,
>>> affects performance?
>>
>> The base_lock is used here because of the need to look for peers based
>> on the ts->peer_id when calling ath12k_peer_find_by_id() function,
>> which i think might affect performance.
>>
>> Do i need to run a throughput test?
> 
> Ok, so to answer my question: no, you didn't do any performance
> analysis. Throughput test might not be enough, for example the driver
> can be used on slower systems and running the test on a fast CPU might
> not reveal any problem. A proper analysis would be much better.
> 

Hi, kalle,
I did a simple performance analysis of the ath12k_dp_tx_update_txcompl() 
function on slower systems.

Firstly, i use perf tool to set dynamic tracepoints in 
ath12k_dp_tx_complete_msdu() function, and then used the command of 
"iperf -c ip address -w 4M -n 1G -i 1" to do traffic test.

During this process, use ./perf record -a -g to detect the performace of 
the system.

Finally, compare the results with and without this patch.

without this patch
./perf report output
children    self	command		symbol
7.28%	   0.08%      ksoftirqd/0 ath12k_dp_tx_complete_msdu
5.96%      0.03%      swapper     ath12k_dp_tx_complete_msdu   		

iperf output
[  1] 0.0000-62.6712 sec  1.00 GBytes   137 Mbits/sec

with this patch
children    self       command         symbol
7.42%	   0.08%      ksoftirqd/0  ath12k_dp_tx_complete_msdu
6.32%      0.03%      swapper      ath12k_dp_tx_complete_msdu

iperf output
[  1] 0.0000-62.6732 sec  1.00 GBytes   137 Mbits/sec

As can be seen from the table above, with this patch, the CPU time 
percentage will increase by 0.5%.

So, i think applying this patch will definitely have an impact on system 
performance, but the impact is not that big and i think it can be ignored:)

Best regards
Lingbo Kong


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-06-05  6:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-04-19  3:21 [PATCH v4 0/3] wifi: ath12k: report station mode stats Lingbo Kong
2024-04-19  3:21 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] wifi: ath12k: report station mode transmit rate Lingbo Kong
2024-04-25 10:37   ` Kalle Valo
2024-04-26  8:01     ` Lingbo Kong
2024-04-26 11:24       ` Kalle Valo
2024-05-07 11:06         ` Lingbo Kong
2024-04-25 16:54   ` Kalle Valo
2024-04-26  6:41     ` Lingbo Kong
2024-04-26 11:21       ` Kalle Valo
2024-04-30 11:41         ` Lingbo Kong
2024-06-05  6:31         ` Lingbo Kong [this message]
2024-06-17 11:50           ` Lingbo Kong
2024-07-04  6:05             ` Lingbo Kong
2024-04-29  9:11   ` Karthikeyan Periyasamy
2024-04-29  9:29     ` Lingbo Kong
2024-04-19  3:21 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] wifi: ath12k: report station mode receive rate for IEEE 802.11be Lingbo Kong
2024-04-19  3:21 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] wifi: ath12k: report station mode signal strength Lingbo Kong
2024-04-25 17:03   ` Kalle Valo

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=4fdfdb34-7892-4bf9-8da1-e09cf6ff7731@quicinc.com \
    --to=quic_lingbok@quicinc.com \
    --cc=ath12k@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=kvalo@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox