From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81E62CA9ECE for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2019 08:35:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 544062080F for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2019 08:35:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="eoaQa8o7"; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="eoaQa8o7" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726656AbfKAIf6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Nov 2019 04:35:58 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:58634 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726532AbfKAIf6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Nov 2019 04:35:58 -0400 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CABC6601C4; Fri, 1 Nov 2019 08:35:57 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1572597357; bh=upIu9a/mPVwbxBiLOKNTleJfHH9HHGM9/Cj5AE/4yxQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=eoaQa8o7ciDUgfpbc7eD6f/JeKt7owpigT4sRgiihjYg9CPRx4Xmk/ovjxROk/cVY BF+hWoZS+W4E/9nOwcS1CXFV0WGmOGL/+oaAZJYi5imrgYRsw5XOXXZqySXxs2IhO9 TLw/u18iZqrKCeUSntVy3PM/IFlPogDbIpJwkQiU= Received: from x230.qca.qualcomm.com (176-93-46-192.bb.dnainternet.fi [176.93.46.192]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: kvalo@smtp.codeaurora.org) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F3E6D60A19; Fri, 1 Nov 2019 08:35:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1572597357; bh=upIu9a/mPVwbxBiLOKNTleJfHH9HHGM9/Cj5AE/4yxQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=eoaQa8o7ciDUgfpbc7eD6f/JeKt7owpigT4sRgiihjYg9CPRx4Xmk/ovjxROk/cVY BF+hWoZS+W4E/9nOwcS1CXFV0WGmOGL/+oaAZJYi5imrgYRsw5XOXXZqySXxs2IhO9 TLw/u18iZqrKCeUSntVy3PM/IFlPogDbIpJwkQiU= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org F3E6D60A19 Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=kvalo@codeaurora.org From: Kalle Valo To: Tony Chuang Cc: Brian Norris , "linux-wireless\@vger.kernel.org" , "g.schlmm\@googlemail.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] rtw88: use a module parameter to control LPS enter References: <20191025093345.22643-4-yhchuang@realtek.com> <20191031075911.3CCB86079C@smtp.codeaurora.org> Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2019 10:35:53 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Tony Chuang's message of "Fri, 1 Nov 2019 03:13:41 +0000") Message-ID: <87a79g0z9y.fsf@codeaurora.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Tony Chuang writes: >> On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 1:17 AM Tony Chuang >> wrote: >> > Or I should just change the >> > value to a better one. By our experience, set this to 50 is a more reasonable >> > value, such that some web surfing or background traffic wouldn't make the >> > driver to leave PS mode. >> >> FWIW, I think choosing a more reasonable default is definitely a good >> start, as long as this choice doesn't have huge downsides. >> >> @Kalle: FYI, this (set to 50) is exactly the change that Tony is >> recommending to me for my distro, and I have the same qualms about >> supporting a growing number of module parameter tweaks like this. So, >> thanks for pushing back :) >> >> Brian >> > > I was afraid of you thinking that setting this to 50 is a strange thing. > But it seems like you'd prefer to change the default value instead of adding a > module parameter to control it. I think we can drop this one and I will send > a patch to change the default value to 50. Yeah, as the first step changing to 50 sounds good to me. Later, if needed, we can extend it to make it configurable from user space, either via the QoS framework or something else. -- Kalle Valo