From: Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan <vasanth@atheros.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: Vasanth Thiagarajan <Vasanth.Thiagarajan@Atheros.com>,
"linville@tuxdriver.com" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath9k: Implement op_flush()
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 15:19:45 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110219094943.GA16465@vasanth-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1298107440.3725.8.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net>
On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 02:54:00PM +0530, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-02-19 at 01:13 -0800, Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan wrote:
> > When op_flush() is called with no drop (drop=false), the driver
> > tries to tx as many frames as possible in about 100ms on every
> > hw queue. During this time period frames from sw queue are also
> > scheduled on to respective hw queue.
>
> Given how long HW queues currently are, I wouldn't set the timeout to
> 100ms -- mac80211 has no expectation how long this will take, although
> 100ms seems pretty long I'm not sure it'll always be sufficient?
It is not that we wait for 100ms always, we return as soon as
possible if there are no pending frames in sw/hw queues. I never
hit this timeout though. In the worst case there can be 128 (4 aggr)
frames pending in sw queue and 2 in hw queue. If we assume each one of
these aggregates has 4ms duration, we at least need 24ms air time at
the lowest rate. If they are not part of AMPDU, it would take a
little bit more I think. So, probably we can give ~40ms timeout,
is that reasonable?. If i'm reading the code correctly, iwlwifi
seems to use 2000ms.
vasanth
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-19 9:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-19 9:13 [PATCH] ath9k: Implement op_flush() Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan
2011-02-19 9:24 ` Johannes Berg
2011-02-19 9:49 ` Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan [this message]
2011-02-19 9:56 ` Johannes Berg
2011-02-19 10:00 ` Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan
2011-02-19 10:09 ` Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan
2011-02-19 10:18 ` 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=20110219094943.GA16465@vasanth-laptop \
--to=vasanth@atheros.com \
--cc=Vasanth.Thiagarajan@Atheros.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).