From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
To: Yibo Zhao <yiboz@codeaurora.org>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath10k@lists.infradead.org,
linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 4/4] mac80211: Sync airtime weight sum with per AC synced sta airtime weight together
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 09:27:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o8za40iz.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ffe79f35d4dcb50aa31dc04035855f79@codeaurora.org>
Yibo Zhao <yiboz@codeaurora.org> writes:
> On 2019-09-23 19:00, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>
>>> - if (params->airtime_weight)
>>> - sta->airtime_weight = params->airtime_weight;
>>> + if (params->airtime_weight &&
>>> + params->airtime_weight != sta->airtime_weight) {
>>
>> This check doesn't work I think? You're not using the array-based
>> sta->airtime_weight[], and there are locking issues by just checking
>> like this; so maybe just keep the if() on params->airtime_weight, and
>> do
>> the checking inside the loop while holding the lock?
>
> It should be array-based sta->airtime_weight[] and I am missing that
> part during the porting. But you are right about we should check it
> inside the loop with the lock.
>
>>
>> Or could we just turn the weights into atomics to avoid the locking
>> entirely?
>
> Actually, we still need the active txq locking to make sure the txq is
> on the rbtree. Otherwise, no need to change airtime weight sum.
True. Just moving the check inside the locking will be the right thing
to do, then.
-Toke
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-24 7:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-23 7:19 [PATCH V3 0/4] Enable virtual time-based airtime scheduler support on ath10k Yibo Zhao
2019-09-23 7:19 ` [PATCH V3 1/4] mac80211: Switch to a virtual time-based airtime scheduler Yibo Zhao
2019-09-23 7:19 ` [PATCH V3 2/4] mac80211: defer txqs removal from rbtree Yibo Zhao
2019-09-23 10:56 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-09-24 2:55 ` Yibo Zhao
2019-09-23 7:20 ` [PATCH V3 3/4] mac80211: fix low throughput in multi-clients situation Yibo Zhao
2019-09-23 10:55 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-09-24 8:22 ` Yibo Zhao
2019-09-24 8:48 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-09-24 8:58 ` Yibo Zhao
2019-09-23 7:20 ` [PATCH V3 4/4] mac80211: Sync airtime weight sum with per AC synced sta airtime weight together Yibo Zhao
2019-09-23 11:00 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-09-24 3:19 ` Yibo Zhao
2019-09-24 7:27 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen [this message]
2019-10-01 10:19 ` [PATCH V3 0/4] Enable virtual time-based airtime scheduler support on ath10k Johannes Berg
2019-10-01 10:59 ` Yibo Zhao
2019-10-01 11:05 ` 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=87o8za40iz.fsf@toke.dk \
--to=toke@redhat.com \
--cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yiboz@codeaurora.org \
/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).