From: Remi Pommarel <repk@triplefau.lt>
To: ath12k@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Nicolas Escande <nico.escande@gmail.com>
Subject: Allocating more RX descriptors that can fit in their related rings
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2024 20:01:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZtigjqSbAWZYU_KQ@pilgrim> (raw)
Hello,
As far as I understand a bunch (ATH12K_RX_DESC_COUNT) of rx descriptors
gets allocated, then CMEM is configured for those descriptors cookie
conversion and is kept available in dp->rx_desc_free_list pool.
Those descriptors seem to be used to fed two different rings, the
rx_refill_buf_ring ring via ath12k_dp_rx_bufs_replenish() and the
reo_reinject_ring one with ath12k_dp_rx_h_defrag_reo_reinject(). While
the former is kept fully used if possible the latter is only used on
demand (i.e. reinjection of defragmented MPDU).
It seems that the number of RX descriptors ATH12K_RX_DESC_COUNT (12288)
is higher than what those two rings can fit (DP_REO_REINJECT_RING_SIZE +
DP_RXDMA_BUF_RING_SIZE = 4096 + 32 = 4128).
My question is why are we allocating that much (12288) buffer if only a
small part (4128) can be used in worst case ?
Wouldn't it be ok to only allocate just enough RX descriptors to fill
both ring (with proper 512 alignment to ease CMEM configuration) as
below ?
#define ATH12K_RX_DESC_COUNT ALIGN(DP_REO_REINJECT_RING_SIZE + \
DP_RXDMA_BUF_RING_SIZE, \
ATH12K_MAX_SPT_ENTRIES)
Or am I missing something and this is going to impact performances ?
Thanks
--
Remi
next reply other threads:[~2024-09-04 18:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-04 18:01 Remi Pommarel [this message]
2024-09-05 18:36 ` Allocating more RX descriptors that can fit in their related rings Kalle Valo
2024-09-06 3:57 ` Karthikeyan Periyasamy
2024-09-06 4:00 ` Karthikeyan Periyasamy
2024-09-06 16:09 ` Remi Pommarel
2024-09-07 2:39 ` Karthikeyan Periyasamy
2024-09-09 13:12 ` Remi Pommarel
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=ZtigjqSbAWZYU_KQ@pilgrim \
--to=repk@triplefau.lt \
--cc=ath12k@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=nico.escande@gmail.com \
/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