linux-wireless.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
To: Pin-yen Lin <treapking@chromium.org>
Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>,
	Amitkumar Karwar <amitkarwar@gmail.com>,
	Ganapathi Bhat <ganapathi017@gmail.com>,
	Sharvari Harisangam <sharvari.harisangam@nxp.com>,
	Xinming Hu <huxinming820@gmail.com>,
	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: mwifiex: Replace RX workqueues with kthreads
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2023 16:47:17 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZIeuhU/vnoL1yWmQ@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEXTbpdDsoghsxbJqszx0OWWw1o9D8p9f_9-4OgOM-a-w7OzSA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

Thanks Pin-yen for most of the investigation here and for pushing the
patch. With some additional information though, I might suggest *not*
landing this patch at the moment. More details appended:

On Sat, Jun 10, 2023 at 01:41:51AM +0800, Pin-yen Lin wrote:
> I realized that I might have over-simplified the background and the
> impact of this patch...
> 
> The short answer to the question is that the throughput improved from
> 100 mbps to 180 mbps. The test was run on ChromeOS's v5.15 kernel
> fork. More detailed test setting is mentioned in [1].
> 
> However, the throughput of the same test case on our v4.19 kernel is
> 320 mbps. That is, we observed a 320 mbps --> 100 mbps regression when
> we tried to update the kernel version. This patch is more like a
> mitigation of the regression. It improves the throughput, even though
> it is still not as good as the older kernel.
> 
> That being said, this patch does improve the throughput, so we think
> this patch can be landed into the mainline kernel.
> 
> Best regards,
> Pin-yen
> 
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZFvpJb9Dh0FCkLQA@google.com/

I (we?) was optimistic this would be an improvement (or at least, no
worse) due to some of the reasoning at [1]. And, the work here is just a
single work item, queued repeatedly to the same unbound workqueue. So
conceptually, it shouldn't be much different than a kthread_worker,
except for scheduler details -- where again, we'd think this should be
an improvement, as the scheduler would now better track load for the
task (mwifiex RX) in question.

But additional testing on other mwifiex-based systems (RK3399 + PCIE
8997) showed the inverse: some throughput drops on similar benchmarks,
from 110 Mbps to 80 Mbps. (Frankly, both numbers are significantly below
where we might like...)

Considering we still don't have a full explanation for all the
performance differences we've been seeing (on either test platform), and
that at least one of our platforms showed a (smaller) regression, I
think we might want to do more research before committing to this.

Brian

  reply	other threads:[~2023-06-12 23:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-06-09 10:35 [PATCH] wifi: mwifiex: Replace RX workqueues with kthreads Pin-yen Lin
2023-06-09 10:41 ` Kalle Valo
2023-06-09 17:41   ` Pin-yen Lin
2023-06-12 23:47     ` Brian Norris [this message]
2023-06-13  5:12       ` Kalle Valo

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=ZIeuhU/vnoL1yWmQ@google.com \
    --to=briannorris@chromium.org \
    --cc=amitkarwar@gmail.com \
    --cc=ganapathi017@gmail.com \
    --cc=huxinming820@gmail.com \
    --cc=kvalo@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sharvari.harisangam@nxp.com \
    --cc=treapking@chromium.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).