From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from s72.web-hosting.com ([198.187.29.22]:43798 "EHLO s72.web-hosting.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751094AbbAOHs0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jan 2015 02:48:26 -0500 From: Sujith Manoharan MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <21687.29026.962216.812998@gargle.gargle.HOWL> (sfid-20150115_084905_401632_AF3A8E91) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 13:20:58 +0530 To: Kalle Valo Cc: , Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: Make HTT fill size configurable In-Reply-To: <87bnm01ojf.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> References: <1420432796-10765-1-git-send-email-sujith@msujith.org> <87r3uy4t9y.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> <21685.35179.110539.780864@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <87bnm01ojf.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Kalle Valo wrote: > Did you read at all what I wrote above? For example, what if we later > don't actually use ATH10K_HTT_MAX_NUM_REFILL anymore? > > And the fundamental problem is that I still don't know what fill value > you think is the best to use here, and that means neither will the > users. That's why the values need to be within ath10k, not expose driver > internals and use some magic numbers which are not available anywhere. What magic numbers ? How is 16 less a magic number than 128 or 96 or the original 1000 ? > We are not limitting anything more. That's not any different from what > your patch does, just that the parameter name is different and the user > doesn't have direct access to the internal parameter. Let me explain a > bit more how that would work in this HTT fill case: > > profile 0 (auto): > profile 1 (slow): > htt_fill_size = ATH10K_HTT_MAX_NUM_REFILL > break: > profile 2 (fast): > htt_fill_size = 77 /* or whatever */ > break; > > So in this method the user can still choose optimal settings for a > certain platform, I assume AP148 in this case, and not know about driver > internals. And if there are more parameters we need to change in the > future, we can use the same modparam to change that as well. You seem to be fixated on some imaginary user that is going to be confused by a module parameter. I don't see how adding more complexity by adding profiles and such is going to make a user less confused. Sujith