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=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,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 CD074CA9EAF for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 09:30:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A20520684 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 09:30:57 +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="RiwyPWXl"; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="KvJb15DF" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2393054AbfJXJa4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Oct 2019 05:30:56 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:51864 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2389413AbfJXJa4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Oct 2019 05:30:56 -0400 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8A0F260A34; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 09:30:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1571909455; bh=2SfAZN67qACR4mjTRZZNqUaA1fycIXiYFgyuyNyBHq8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=RiwyPWXlYfV6OU01uN+0knU8RttM//gPjyJm8nndPcTeM/nnTZ1gr4ae9K65zhPH/ KGe0LAC4lHVxUp3iKSozGHwLJMwQKPOhhLktf3I+G5c+OYxqPFJIa5bkfGStBj/Y2X 13mV4sw4ekQyNsNALmJR/70+noVBtSx3g4WLPgw0= Received: from potku.adurom.net (unknown [88.114.240.156]) (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 65578607C3; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 09:30:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1571909454; bh=2SfAZN67qACR4mjTRZZNqUaA1fycIXiYFgyuyNyBHq8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=KvJb15DFDdqDHY7se6I6W6g54Q+V/cdnbNerQWWMoJ9lxJp6THV216YrXHzzqBZIK 09H7I3BNDLMRMYj/daXGM7Dx5vKdsa7q0ty4il53lz20WoSdSHERyaB1i6GHJ+Wvte pUUjD3tfx65FX3NZN/2tmpR2f21oe1i6wU3rLe5w= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 65578607C3 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: Wen Gong Cc: ath10k@lists.infradead.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] ath10k: change max RX bundle size from 8 to 32 for sdio References: <1569402639-31720-1-git-send-email-wgong@codeaurora.org> <1569402639-31720-3-git-send-email-wgong@codeaurora.org> Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 12:30:50 +0300 In-Reply-To: <1569402639-31720-3-git-send-email-wgong@codeaurora.org> (Wen Gong's message of "Wed, 25 Sep 2019 17:10:38 +0800") Message-ID: <87mudqsd6d.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> 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 Wen Gong writes: > The max bundle size support by firmware is 32, change it from 8 to 32 > will help performance. This results in significant performance > improvement on RX path. > > Tested with QCA6174 SDIO with firmware > WLAN.RMH.4.4.1-00017-QCARMSWPZ-1 > > Signed-off-by: Wen Gong [...] > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.c > @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ > #include "trace.h" > #include "sdio.h" > > -#define ATH10K_SDIO_VSG_BUF_SIZE (32 * 1024) > +#define ATH10K_SDIO_VSG_BUF_SIZE (64 * 1024) Is allocating 64 kb with kmalloc() reliable, especially on smaller systems? I hope it is, but checking if someone else knows better. We only do this only once in probe(), though. -- https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches