From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [45.145.95.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 613441E3DE3 for ; Thu, 7 Nov 2024 09:36:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.145.95.4 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730972171; cv=none; b=ePMeou88h1csZ+UUzR3oAPPk0SRfoatPYyWBmol+GT85EYWC155Vj13Uvr1JtLfsVfkiu4d1+dw8zvVJ5KXcZi4RZnmDDdZxTJ3tpkzB7yLs3PIWh15q4rHFckRXj16Uc5Mdfa6YISwNYpsh6U4BTJvUFQh6PRlT5tFgFhjdQYk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730972171; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Oz5vc1v5cRJA8Au+w4A3iYC10lutyIM+uyKGO+bh6n0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=SQmrcMBeTXQchfWRb1kQBdbjoD/CVKfJVuC2tquwwsDzjmHhEFLn+Lzeon/6hLS/6opwvzq2oVzPsSPQXyZ/knHPRrDaGJc+usRldIWJ4LYZ0ERNdSg3nI3JZMY6xUbTk0N2GlcMaksFhiRVMIaWXBcvNL6CxhZ+ThLifzYO3Aw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=toke.dk; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=toke.dk; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk header.i=@toke.dk header.b=LY71vcJM; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.145.95.4 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=toke.dk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=toke.dk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk header.i=@toke.dk header.b="LY71vcJM" From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1730972167; bh=Oz5vc1v5cRJA8Au+w4A3iYC10lutyIM+uyKGO+bh6n0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=LY71vcJMkhtWQ2YhSP+y8Be0S5w5sMC56zt3FC4Mr5FXVHYXaUHSjuUjiBb6gpOaw bAATOHoCDNjfdkv07+kDZzekswtc6SaPuSG11jpo6BLymAtzcezXN90Tly/4sltOyR O97k1IL7y/DKOauTJtsr1Y0vpIflUQOGkl20OQth2jusHnjmiWAHljpcBRv+osyp0F Id7tbUr0Xf6xDrCz4dUtoTbKXyIvlM+iYZwtYEIviCkOier9E5tX/M0E5zPPtjRoSg 4htXpSpJBwy8ogLtoIgMNIAfaymF1FioADMxVU9fbAgqfyyw52Cn2or5Y1dwc781S6 hnzYbeQ+lkpbQ== To: Simon Wunderlich , Sven Eckelmann , Kalle Valo Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Felix Fietkau , ih@simonwunderlich.de Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath9k: Add RX inactivity detection and reset chip when it occurs In-Reply-To: <5009451.31r3eYUQgx@prime> References: <20241106-ath9k-deaf-detection-v1-1-736a150d2425@redhat.com> <3288096.AJdgDx1Vlc@ripper> <87msic78no.fsf@toke.dk> <5009451.31r3eYUQgx@prime> Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2024 10:36:07 +0100 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87cyj775dk.fsf@toke.dk> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Simon Wunderlich writes: > On Wednesday, November 6, 2024 3:12:59 PM CET Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rg= ensen wrote: >> Sven Eckelmann writes: >> > Hi, >> >=20 >> > Thank you for submitting the patch. >> >=20 >> > On Wednesday, 6 November 2024 13:41:44 CET Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rg= ensen wrote: >> >> Since this is based on ideas by all three people, but not actually >> >> directly derived from any of the patches, I'm including Suggested-by >> >> tags from Simon, Sven and Felix below, which should hopefully serve as >> >> proper credit. >> >=20 >> > At least for me, this is more than enough. Thanks. >> >=20 >> > I don't have the setup at the moment to test it again - maybe Issam ca= n do >> > this. One concern I would have (because I don't find the notes regardi= ng >> > this problem), is whether this check is now breaking because we count >> > more things. In the past, rxlp/rxok was used for the check. And now I >> > don't know whether the count for the other ones were still increasing. >> >=20 >> > * RXHP (rather sure that "high priority frame" wasn't increasing) >> > * RXEOL ("no RX descriptors available" - I would guess no, but I can't= say >> > for>=20 >> > sure) >> >=20 >> > * RXORN ("FIFO overrun" I would guess no, but I can't say for sure) >> >=20 >> > Reviewed-by: Sven Eckelmann >>=20 >> Great, thanks for the review! I'll let it sit in patchwork for a little >> while to give people a chance to test it out before sending it over to >> Kalle to be applied :) >>=20 >> -Toke > > Hi Toke, > > this looks good to me in general. I'm not sure either about the particula= r RX=20 > interrupts. We can test this by putting the AP in a shield box and verify= that=20 > the counters are actually increasing, and that should be good enough. > > Acked-by: Simon Wunderlich Great, thanks! Would be awesome if you could test it out an report back! :) -Toke