From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kalle Valo Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 15:37:35 +0300 Subject: [ath9k-devel] [RFC/RFT 6/7] ath10k: add active htc ul pipe polling support In-Reply-To: <1368185830-29519-7-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com> (Michal Kazior's message of "Fri, 10 May 2013 13:37:09 +0200") References: <1368185830-29519-1-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com> <1368185830-29519-7-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com> Message-ID: <87a9nwqv00.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org Michal Kazior writes: > Until now we depended solely on passive or lazy > polling for tx completion. > > The passive was in htc rx handler. The lazy in > htc_send_work(). The lazy would fire only if there > are less than 50% resources free. However for HTT > tx we have 2047 resources and we never used more > than 512 (HTT_MAX_PENDING_TX). > > It is a good idea to have a timer that polls for > tx completions "just in case". This could help if > mac80211 is waiting for tx status and there's no > tx/rx happening. > > Signed-off-by: Michal Kazior I haven't tested your patches yet, but I'm a bit concerned about the timer. Timers usually create problems of their own and using them wrong affect power consumption. I don't have time to read the patches in detail, but can you give a short summary how the timer works? How often is it fired? What happens when the data path is idle? And is it absolutely necessary to use a timer? Can't we use tx completions or some other existing event from firmware to accomplish the same? -- Kalle Valo