From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <lrodriguez@atheros.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: Luis Rodriguez <Luis.Rodriguez@Atheros.com>,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@bombadil.infradead.org>,
"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] mac80211: move TX status processing to process context
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:15:21 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091118211521.GK6581@tux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1258578682.30511.82.camel@johannes.local>
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 01:11:22PM -0800, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 13:06 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>
> > OK, but can't you still have a driver spam mac80211 with a lot of
> > ieee80211_tx_status_irqsafe() calls in soft irq context with the final
> > skb requiring the tx complete, in that case the queue *will* get stuffed
> > and you could potentially free more if so desired.
>
> But it'll get stuffed one by one, and we free them as we stuff the
> queue, so it can't ever loop :)
Ah yes, I see... :)
> > Also, if our goal is to just avoid adding the skb if it does not require
> > a tx complete and our queue size is too large
> >
> > if (!(info->flags & IEEE80211_TX_CTL_REQ_TX_STATUS) &&
> > num + 1 > IEEE80211_TX_STATUS_QUEUE_LIMIT)
> > dev_kfree_skb_irq(skb);
> > else
> > skb_queue_tail(&local->skb_queue)
>
> No, we actually want to drop the older ones in that case.
Got it.. some info added behind this logic might help.
> > > However ... right now we never use _any_ unreliable at all, but I
> > > suspect we will want to change that again at some point.
> >
> > Just curious -- what would be a use case for that?
>
> Any time we don't need TX status for rate control it'd be OK to drop
> frames that we don't need the status for. For example the hw-rc case my
> patch from yesterday introduced.
Oh, haven't gotten to TX just yet, thanks this will probaby help.
Luis
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-18 21:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-18 19:16 [RFC] mac80211: move TX status processing to process context Johannes Berg
2009-11-18 19:53 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2009-11-18 20:01 ` Johannes Berg
2009-11-18 20:23 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2009-11-18 20:34 ` Johannes Berg
2009-11-18 21:06 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2009-11-18 21:11 ` Johannes Berg
2009-11-18 21:15 ` Luis R. Rodriguez [this message]
2009-11-18 21:12 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2009-11-18 21:13 ` Johannes Berg
2009-11-19 13:34 ` Johannes Berg
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=20091118211521.GK6581@tux \
--to=lrodriguez@atheros.com \
--cc=Luis.Rodriguez@Atheros.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@bombadil.infradead.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