From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: use non-zero TID only for QoS frames
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2018 13:07:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <871sa86w44.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1536144985.3528.7.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> writes:
> On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 11:56 +0200, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen wrote:
>
>> > So basically this gets rid of a corner case that we shouldn't have.
>> > Either we should decide that using different TXQs is *always* correct
>> > for non-QoS, or - what I thought - that this isn't worth it, and then =
we
>> > should *never* do it.
>>=20
>> Yeah, I agree that this is not worth it. The queue is already
>> FQ-CoDel'ed, which gives us most of the benefit of QoS anyway :)
>
> So do I read that as a tentative ack? :)
Yeah, guess so :)
> Felix wasn't really convinced, I think. He also pointed out some drivers
> use skb->priority without checking anything, but I'm not sure we can
> really squash all the cases of setting skb priority easily?
~/build/linux/drivers/net/wireless $ git grep 'skb->priority =3D '
ath/ath9k/channel.c: skb->priority =3D 7;
broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/core.c: skb->priority =3D cfg80211_classify802=
1d(skb, NULL);
broadcom/brcm80211/brcmutil/utils.c: skb->priority =3D 0;
intel/ipw2x00/libipw_tx.c: skb->priority =3D libipw_classify(skb);
marvell/mwifiex/cfg80211.c: skb->priority =3D LOW_PRIO_TID;
marvell/mwifiex/main.c: skb->priority =3D cfg80211_classify8021d(skb, NULL);
marvell/mwifiex/tdls.c: skb->priority =3D MWIFIEX_PRIO_BK;
marvell/mwifiex/tdls.c: skb->priority =3D MWIFIEX_PRIO_VI;
marvell/mwifiex/tdls.c: skb->priority =3D MWIFIEX_PRIO_VI;
rsi/rsi_91x_core.c: skb->priority =3D q_num;
rsi/rsi_91x_core.c: skb->priority =3D TID_TO_WME_AC(tid);
rsi/rsi_91x_core.c: skb->priority =3D BE_Q;
rsi/rsi_91x_core.c: skb->priority =3D q_num;
rsi/rsi_91x_hal.c: skb->priority =3D VO_Q;
rsi/rsi_91x_mgmt.c: skb->priority =3D MGMT_SOFT_Q;
ti/wlcore/main.c: skb->priority =3D WL1271_TID_MGMT;
Doesn't seem *that* excessive? Obviously there could be other cases, and
I haven't looked closer at any of those...
Does it matter for the drivers that don't use TXQs?
-Toke
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-05 15:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-05 8:00 [PATCH] mac80211: use non-zero TID only for QoS frames Johannes Berg
2018-09-05 8:06 ` Arend van Spriel
2018-09-05 8:09 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-05 9:47 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-09-05 9:50 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-05 9:56 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-09-05 10:56 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-05 11:07 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen [this message]
2018-09-05 11:08 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-05 11:12 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
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=871sa86w44.fsf@toke.dk \
--to=toke@toke.dk \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nbd@nbd.name \
/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).