From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Elder Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/17] net: introduce Qualcomm IPA driver Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 11:21:50 -0500 Message-ID: <5ffbcce1-f93d-5746-5037-9dcc03cd73f0@linaro.org> References: <380a6185-7ad1-6be0-060b-e6e5d4126917@linaro.org> <583907409fad854bd3c18be688ec2724ad7a60e9.camel@sipsolutions.net> <31c2c94c-c6d3-595b-c138-faa54d0bfc00@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Berg , Arnd Bergmann Cc: abhishek.esse@gmail.com, Ben Chan , Bjorn Andersson , cpratapa@codeaurora.org, David Miller , Dan Williams , DTML , Eric Caruso , evgreen@chromium.org, Ilias Apalodimas , Linux ARM , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-soc@vger.kernel.org, Networking , Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan , syadagir@codeaurora.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 6/18/19 2:22 PM, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Tue, 2019-06-18 at 09:00 -0500, Alex Elder wrote: . . . > Anyway, I think for now we could probably live with not having this > configurable for the IPA driver, and if it *does* need to be > configurable, it seems like it should be a driver configuration, not a > channel configuration - so something like a debugfs hook if you really > just need to play with it for performance testing, or a module > parameter, or something else? > > Or even, in the WWAN framework, a knob that we provide there for the > WWAN device, rather than for the (newly created) channel. Agreed. I think a knob is appropriate, it's just a question of how that control exposed. Same answer to your question below. -Alex >> The hardware is capable of aggregating QMAP packets >> arriving on a connection into a single buffer, so this provides >> a way of requesting it do that. >> >>>> #define RMNET_FLAGS_INGRESS_MAP_COMMANDS (1U << 1) >>> >>> Similar here? If you have flow control you probably want to use it? >> >> I agree with that, though perhaps there are cases where it >> is pointless, or can't be supported, so one might want to >> simply *not* implement/advertise the feature. I don't know. > > Sure, but then that's likely something the driver would need to know, > not necessarily userspace? > > johannes >