From: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>
To: "Grumbach, Emmanuel" <emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com>
Cc: "ilw@linux.intel.com" <ilw@linux.intel.com>,
"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Ilw] Question about iwl_pcie_rxq_inc_wr_ptr
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 12:33:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130819103300.GA10723@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0BA3FCBA62E2DC44AF3030971E174FB301A2954B@HASMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 09:32:58AM +0000, Grumbach, Emmanuel wrote:
> >
> > I would like to ask if below change is safe (I'm considering to do that change
> > on iwlegacy):
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/pcie/rx.c
> > b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/pcie/rx.c
> > index 567e67a..1ebdb83 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/pcie/rx.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/pcie/rx.c
> > @@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ static void iwl_pcie_rxq_inc_wr_ptr(struct iwl_trans
> > *trans, struct iwl_rxq *q)
> > } else {
> > /* Device expects a multiple of 8 */
> > q->write_actual = (q->write & ~0x7);
> > - iwl_write_direct32(trans, FH_RSCSR_CHNL0_WPTR,
> > + iwl_write32(trans, FH_RSCSR_CHNL0_WPTR,
> > q->write_actual);
> > }
> > }
> >
> > This register seems to be only read by firmware, so maybe we can modify it
> > without grab nic access. We are doing that on iwl_pcie_txq_inc_wr_ptr().
> >
>
> I am not sure...
> I am not sure what would be the behavior: not updating the value at all, or having the HW use an old value for a while.
> Does this cost you so much CPU that it justifies such a change?
I have those bug reports:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863386
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=889467
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895650
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=989025
All are 4965 specific - I haven't seen similar traces on iwlwifi. On
some cases use nohz=off boot option helped with the problem, so this
could be also some kernel issue when udelay() is not working as
expected. Anyway I'm considering to remove grab_nic_access from that
path and would like to know possible consequences from firmware
perspective.
Stanislaw
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-19 10:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-02 8:42 Question about iwl_pcie_rxq_inc_wr_ptr Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-08-19 9:32 ` [Ilw] " Grumbach, Emmanuel
2013-08-19 10:33 ` Stanislaw Gruszka [this message]
2013-08-19 10:34 ` Grumbach, Emmanuel
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=20130819103300.GA10723@redhat.com \
--to=sgruszka@redhat.com \
--cc=emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com \
--cc=ilw@linux.intel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).