From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com>
To: Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@tieto.com>
Cc: Janusz Dziedzic <janusz.dziedzic@tieto.com>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
"ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: improve rx path when play with attention flags
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 19:29:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <871typlr3e.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+BoTQkgFVgWGJTTLOJ2tiqqaJ=0O7JvGAMDWc8JHt0rJP92UA@mail.gmail.com> (Michal Kazior's message of "Tue, 25 Feb 2014 08:24:49 +0100")
Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@tieto.com> writes:
> On 25 February 2014 08:13, Janusz Dziedzic <janusz.dziedzic@tieto.com> wrote:
>> Currently when we check attention flags we do __le32_to_cpu()
>> four times for each packet. This could have performance
>> impact for BIG endian platforms. This patch improve this
>> little bit.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Janusz Dziedzic <janusz.dziedzic@tieto.com>
[...]
>> @@ -929,6 +873,9 @@ static void ath10k_htt_rx_handler(struct ath10k_htt *htt,
>> struct sk_buff *msdu_head, *msdu_tail;
>> enum htt_rx_mpdu_status status;
>> int msdu_chaining;
>> + struct htt_rx_desc *rxd;
>> + u32 att_flags;
>> +
>
> No need for an empty line I suppose? I would also prefer `attention`
> instead of `att_flags`, but no big deal.
Yeah, attention is better.
And also the variable declarations should be in the beginning of
function. Apparently I have been sloppy missed that here.
--
Kalle Valo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-26 17:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-25 7:13 [PATCH] ath10k: improve rx path when play with attention flags Janusz Dziedzic
2014-02-25 7:24 ` Michal Kazior
2014-02-26 17:29 ` Kalle Valo [this message]
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=871typlr3e.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com \
--to=kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com \
--cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=janusz.dziedzic@tieto.com \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michal.kazior@tieto.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).