From: Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com>
To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@adurom.com>
Cc: Arik Nemtsov <arik@wizery.com>, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] wl12xx: reset link Tx queues when freeing it
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 10:39:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1330504788.18637.90.camel@cumari> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87pqcyavn5.fsf@purkki.adurom.net>
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 10:31 +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com> writes:
>
> >> @@ -973,8 +974,14 @@ void wl12xx_tx_reset(struct wl1271 *wl, bool reset_tx_queues)
> >> struct sk_buff *skb;
> >> struct ieee80211_tx_info *info;
> >>
> >> - for (i = 0; i < NUM_TX_QUEUES; i++)
> >> - wl->tx_queue_count[i] = 0;
> >> + /* only reset the queues if something bad happened */
> >> + if (WARN_ON(wl1271_tx_total_queue_count(wl) != 0)) {
> >
> > Let's make all these WARN_ONs as WARN_ON_ONCE as it is recommended
> > nowadays. This will make Kalle Valo happier. :)
>
> Hehe. Actually the dislike against WARN_ON() was started by John, I
> again started the war to killing BUG_ON() :)
Right, John's email was where I got the "recommended" from. ;)
> But nevertheless, this changes makes also me happy. I have seen cases
> where the whole system reboots because of WARN_ON() spam, so
> WARN_ON_ONCE() is much better in in cases where's a possibility that it
> will get printed a lot. Of course printk_ratelimit() is another option,
> but for some reason it isn't that popular.
Yeah, I totally agree. Especially when we have a loop, WARN_ON_ONCE
should be sufficient, in my opinion.
--
Cheers,
Luca.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-29 8:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-27 22:41 [PATCH 1/7] wl12xx: set the ELP entry delay to the FW dyn-ps timeout Arik Nemtsov
2012-02-27 22:41 ` [PATCH 2/7] wl12xx: change bits in the link_map under spin lock Arik Nemtsov
2012-02-27 22:41 ` [PATCH 3/7] wl12xx: reset link Tx queues when freeing it Arik Nemtsov
2012-02-28 9:51 ` Luciano Coelho
2012-02-28 10:09 ` Arik Nemtsov
2012-02-29 8:31 ` Kalle Valo
2012-02-29 8:39 ` Luciano Coelho [this message]
2012-02-27 22:41 ` [PATCH 4/7] wl12xx: avoid starving the system hlid Arik Nemtsov
2012-02-27 22:41 ` [PATCH 5/7] wl12xx: flush all Tx queues on tx_flush timeout Arik Nemtsov
2012-02-27 22:41 ` [PATCH 6/7] wl12xx: flush Tx during suspend and 802.11h chan switch Arik Nemtsov
2012-02-27 22:41 ` [PATCH 7/7] wl12xx: increase dynamic PS timeout to 200ms Arik Nemtsov
2012-02-28 12:05 ` [PATCH 1/7] wl12xx: set the ELP entry delay to the FW dyn-ps timeout Luciano Coelho
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=1330504788.18637.90.camel@cumari \
--to=coelho@ti.com \
--cc=arik@wizery.com \
--cc=kvalo@adurom.com \
--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