All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sebastian Gottschall <s.gottschall@dd-wrt.com>
To: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Rakesh Pillai <pillair@codeaurora.org>
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>,
	"dianders@chromium.org" <dianders@chromium.org>,
	Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>,
	"evgreen@chromium.org" <evgreen@chromium.org>,
	"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"johannes@sipsolutions.net" <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"kvalo@codeaurora.org" <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/7] Add support to process rx packets in thread
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2020 12:38:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8359a849-2b8a-c842-a501-c6cb6966e345@dd-wrt.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200725081633.7432-1-hdanton@sina.com>

you may consider this

https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1142611.html 
<https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1142611.html>

years ago someone already wanted to bring this feature upstream, but it 
was denied. i already tested this patch the last 2 days and it worked so 
far (with some little modifications)
so such a solution existed already and may be considered here

Sebastian


someone

Am 25.07.2020 um 10:16 schrieb Hillf Danton:
> On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:12:42 +0000 David Laight wrote:
>>> On 21 July 2020 18:25 Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 10:44:19PM +0530, Rakesh Pillai wrote:
>>>> NAPI gets scheduled on the CPU core which got the
>>>> interrupt. The linux scheduler cannot move it to a
>>>> different core, even if the CPU on which NAPI is running
>>>> is heavily loaded. This can lead to degraded wifi
>>>> performance when running traffic at peak data rates.
>>>>
>>>> A thread on the other hand can be moved to different
>>>> CPU cores, if the one on which its running is heavily
>>>> loaded. During high incoming data traffic, this gives
>>>> better performance, since the thread can be moved to a
>>>> less loaded or sometimes even a more powerful CPU core
>>>> to account for the required CPU performance in order
>>>> to process the incoming packets.
>>>>
>>>> This patch series adds the support to use a high priority
>>>> thread to process the incoming packets, as opposed to
>>>> everything being done in NAPI context.
>>> I don't see why this problem is limited to the ath10k driver. I expect
>>> it applies to all drivers using NAPI. So shouldn't you be solving this
>>> in the NAPI core? Allow a driver to request the NAPI core uses a
>>> thread?
>> It's not just NAPI the problem is with the softint processing.
>> I suspect a lot of systems would work better if it ran as
>> a (highish priority) kernel thread.
> Hi folks
>
> Below is a minimunm poc implementation I can imagine on top of workqueue
> to make napi threaded. Thoughts are appreciated.
>
>> I've had to remove the main locks from a multi-threaded application
>> and replace them with atomic counters.
>> Consider what happens when the threads remove items from a shared
>> work list.
>> The code looks like:
>> 	mutex_enter();
>> 	remove_item_from_list();
>> 	mutex_exit().
>> The mutex is only held for a few instructions, so while you'd expect
>> the cache line to be 'hot' you wouldn't get real contention.
>> However the following scenarios happen:
>> 1) An ethernet interrupt happens while the mutex is held.
>>     This stops the other threads until all the softint processing
>>     has finished.
>> 2) An ethernet interrupt (and softint) runs on a thread that is
>>     waiting for the mutex.
>>     (Or on the cpu that the thread's processor affinity ties it to.)
>>     In this case the 'fair' (ticket) mutex code won't let any other
>>     thread acquire the mutex.
>>     So again everything stops until the softints all complete.
>>
>> The second one is also a problem when trying to wake up all
>> the threads (eg after adding a lot of items to the list).
>> The ticket locks force them to wake in order, but
>> sometimes the 'thundering herd' would work better.
>>
>> IIRC this is actually worse for processes running under the RT
>> scheduler (without CONFIG_PREEMPT) because the they are almost
>> always scheduled on the same cpu they ran on last.
>> If it is busy, but cannot be pre-empted, they are not moved
>> to an idle cpu.
>>     
>> To confound things there is a very broken workaround for broken
>> hardware in the driver for the e1000 interface on (at least)
>> Ivy Bridge cpu that can cause the driver to spin for a very
>> long time (IIRC milliseconds) whenever it has to write to a
>> MAC register (ie on every transmit setup).
>>
>> 	David
>>
>> -
>> Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
>> Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
> To make napi threaded, if either irq or softirq thread is entirely ruled
> out, add napi::work that will be queued on a highpri workqueue. It is
> actually a unbound one to facilitate scheduler to catter napi loads on to
> idle CPU cores. What users need to do with the threaded napi
> is s/netif_napi_add/netif_threaded_napi_add/ and no more.
>
> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> @@ -338,6 +338,9 @@ struct napi_struct {
>   	struct list_head	dev_list;
>   	struct hlist_node	napi_hash_node;
>   	unsigned int		napi_id;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THREADED_NAPI
> +	struct work_struct	work;
> +#endif
>   };
>   
>   enum {
> @@ -2234,6 +2237,19 @@ static inline void *netdev_priv(const st
>   void netif_napi_add(struct net_device *dev, struct napi_struct *napi,
>   		    int (*poll)(struct napi_struct *, int), int weight);
>   
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THREADED_NAPI
> +void netif_threaded_napi_add(struct net_device *dev, struct napi_struct *napi,
> +		    int (*poll)(struct napi_struct *, int), int weight);
> +#else
> +static inline void netif_threaded_napi_add(struct net_device *dev,
> +					struct napi_struct *napi,
> +					int (*poll)(struct napi_struct *, int),
> +					int weight)
> +{
> +	netif_napi_add(dev, napi, poll, weight);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
>   /**
>    *	netif_tx_napi_add - initialize a NAPI context
>    *	@dev:  network device
> --- a/net/core/dev.c
> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> @@ -6277,6 +6277,61 @@ static int process_backlog(struct napi_s
>   	return work;
>   }
>   
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THREADED_NAPI
> +/* unbound highpri workqueue for threaded napi */
> +static struct workqueue_struct *napi_workq;
> +
> +static void napi_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
> +{
> +	struct napi_struct *n = container_of(work, struct napi_struct, work);
> +
> +	for (;;) {
> +		if (!test_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED, &n->state))
> +			return;
> +
> +		if (n->poll(n, n->weight) < n->weight)
> +			return;
> +
> +		if (need_resched()) {
> +			/*
> +			 * have to pay for the latency of task switch even if
> +			 * napi is scheduled
> +			 */
> +			if (test_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED, &n->state))
> +				queue_work(napi_workq, work);
> +			return;
> +		}
> +	}
> +}
> +
> +void netif_threaded_napi_add(struct net_device *dev,
> +				struct napi_struct *napi,
> +				int (*poll)(struct napi_struct *, int),
> +				int weight)
> +{
> +	netif_napi_add(dev, napi, poll, weight);
> +	INIT_WORK(&napi->work, napi_workfn);
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool is_threaded_napi(struct napi_struct *n)
> +{
> +	return n->work.func == napi_workfn;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void threaded_napi_sched(struct napi_struct *n)
> +{
> +	if (is_threaded_napi(n))
> +		queue_work(napi_workq, &n->work);
> +	else
> +		____napi_schedule(this_cpu_ptr(&softnet_data), n);
> +}
> +#else
> +static inline void threaded_napi_sched(struct napi_struct *n)
> +{
> +	____napi_schedule(this_cpu_ptr(&softnet_data), n);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
>   /**
>    * __napi_schedule - schedule for receive
>    * @n: entry to schedule
> @@ -6289,7 +6344,7 @@ void __napi_schedule(struct napi_struct
>   	unsigned long flags;
>   
>   	local_irq_save(flags);
> -	____napi_schedule(this_cpu_ptr(&softnet_data), n);
> +	threaded_napi_sched(n);
>   	local_irq_restore(flags);
>   }
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL(__napi_schedule);
> @@ -6335,7 +6390,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(napi_schedule_prep);
>    */
>   void __napi_schedule_irqoff(struct napi_struct *n)
>   {
> -	____napi_schedule(this_cpu_ptr(&softnet_data), n);
> +	threaded_napi_sched(n);
>   }
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL(__napi_schedule_irqoff);
>   
> @@ -10685,6 +10740,10 @@ static int __init net_dev_init(void)
>   		sd->backlog.weight = weight_p;
>   	}
>   
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THREADED_NAPI
> +	napi_workq = alloc_workqueue("napi_workq", WQ_UNBOUND | WQ_HIGHPRI,
> +					    WQ_UNBOUND_MAX_ACTIVE);
> +#endif
>   	dev_boot_phase = 0;
>   
>   	/* The loopback device is special if any other network devices
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ath10k mailing list
> ath10k@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k
>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Sebastian Gottschall <s.gottschall@dd-wrt.com>
To: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Rakesh Pillai <pillair@codeaurora.org>
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>,
	"dianders@chromium.org" <dianders@chromium.org>,
	Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>,
	"evgreen@chromium.org" <evgreen@chromium.org>,
	"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"johannes@sipsolutions.net" <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"kvalo@codeaurora.org" <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/7] Add support to process rx packets in thread
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2020 12:38:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8359a849-2b8a-c842-a501-c6cb6966e345@dd-wrt.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200725081633.7432-1-hdanton@sina.com>

you may consider this

https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1142611.html 
<https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1142611.html>

years ago someone already wanted to bring this feature upstream, but it 
was denied. i already tested this patch the last 2 days and it worked so 
far (with some little modifications)
so such a solution existed already and may be considered here

Sebastian


someone

Am 25.07.2020 um 10:16 schrieb Hillf Danton:
> On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:12:42 +0000 David Laight wrote:
>>> On 21 July 2020 18:25 Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 10:44:19PM +0530, Rakesh Pillai wrote:
>>>> NAPI gets scheduled on the CPU core which got the
>>>> interrupt. The linux scheduler cannot move it to a
>>>> different core, even if the CPU on which NAPI is running
>>>> is heavily loaded. This can lead to degraded wifi
>>>> performance when running traffic at peak data rates.
>>>>
>>>> A thread on the other hand can be moved to different
>>>> CPU cores, if the one on which its running is heavily
>>>> loaded. During high incoming data traffic, this gives
>>>> better performance, since the thread can be moved to a
>>>> less loaded or sometimes even a more powerful CPU core
>>>> to account for the required CPU performance in order
>>>> to process the incoming packets.
>>>>
>>>> This patch series adds the support to use a high priority
>>>> thread to process the incoming packets, as opposed to
>>>> everything being done in NAPI context.
>>> I don't see why this problem is limited to the ath10k driver. I expect
>>> it applies to all drivers using NAPI. So shouldn't you be solving this
>>> in the NAPI core? Allow a driver to request the NAPI core uses a
>>> thread?
>> It's not just NAPI the problem is with the softint processing.
>> I suspect a lot of systems would work better if it ran as
>> a (highish priority) kernel thread.
> Hi folks
>
> Below is a minimunm poc implementation I can imagine on top of workqueue
> to make napi threaded. Thoughts are appreciated.
>
>> I've had to remove the main locks from a multi-threaded application
>> and replace them with atomic counters.
>> Consider what happens when the threads remove items from a shared
>> work list.
>> The code looks like:
>> 	mutex_enter();
>> 	remove_item_from_list();
>> 	mutex_exit().
>> The mutex is only held for a few instructions, so while you'd expect
>> the cache line to be 'hot' you wouldn't get real contention.
>> However the following scenarios happen:
>> 1) An ethernet interrupt happens while the mutex is held.
>>     This stops the other threads until all the softint processing
>>     has finished.
>> 2) An ethernet interrupt (and softint) runs on a thread that is
>>     waiting for the mutex.
>>     (Or on the cpu that the thread's processor affinity ties it to.)
>>     In this case the 'fair' (ticket) mutex code won't let any other
>>     thread acquire the mutex.
>>     So again everything stops until the softints all complete.
>>
>> The second one is also a problem when trying to wake up all
>> the threads (eg after adding a lot of items to the list).
>> The ticket locks force them to wake in order, but
>> sometimes the 'thundering herd' would work better.
>>
>> IIRC this is actually worse for processes running under the RT
>> scheduler (without CONFIG_PREEMPT) because the they are almost
>> always scheduled on the same cpu they ran on last.
>> If it is busy, but cannot be pre-empted, they are not moved
>> to an idle cpu.
>>     
>> To confound things there is a very broken workaround for broken
>> hardware in the driver for the e1000 interface on (at least)
>> Ivy Bridge cpu that can cause the driver to spin for a very
>> long time (IIRC milliseconds) whenever it has to write to a
>> MAC register (ie on every transmit setup).
>>
>> 	David
>>
>> -
>> Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
>> Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
> To make napi threaded, if either irq or softirq thread is entirely ruled
> out, add napi::work that will be queued on a highpri workqueue. It is
> actually a unbound one to facilitate scheduler to catter napi loads on to
> idle CPU cores. What users need to do with the threaded napi
> is s/netif_napi_add/netif_threaded_napi_add/ and no more.
>
> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> @@ -338,6 +338,9 @@ struct napi_struct {
>   	struct list_head	dev_list;
>   	struct hlist_node	napi_hash_node;
>   	unsigned int		napi_id;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THREADED_NAPI
> +	struct work_struct	work;
> +#endif
>   };
>   
>   enum {
> @@ -2234,6 +2237,19 @@ static inline void *netdev_priv(const st
>   void netif_napi_add(struct net_device *dev, struct napi_struct *napi,
>   		    int (*poll)(struct napi_struct *, int), int weight);
>   
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THREADED_NAPI
> +void netif_threaded_napi_add(struct net_device *dev, struct napi_struct *napi,
> +		    int (*poll)(struct napi_struct *, int), int weight);
> +#else
> +static inline void netif_threaded_napi_add(struct net_device *dev,
> +					struct napi_struct *napi,
> +					int (*poll)(struct napi_struct *, int),
> +					int weight)
> +{
> +	netif_napi_add(dev, napi, poll, weight);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
>   /**
>    *	netif_tx_napi_add - initialize a NAPI context
>    *	@dev:  network device
> --- a/net/core/dev.c
> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> @@ -6277,6 +6277,61 @@ static int process_backlog(struct napi_s
>   	return work;
>   }
>   
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THREADED_NAPI
> +/* unbound highpri workqueue for threaded napi */
> +static struct workqueue_struct *napi_workq;
> +
> +static void napi_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
> +{
> +	struct napi_struct *n = container_of(work, struct napi_struct, work);
> +
> +	for (;;) {
> +		if (!test_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED, &n->state))
> +			return;
> +
> +		if (n->poll(n, n->weight) < n->weight)
> +			return;
> +
> +		if (need_resched()) {
> +			/*
> +			 * have to pay for the latency of task switch even if
> +			 * napi is scheduled
> +			 */
> +			if (test_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED, &n->state))
> +				queue_work(napi_workq, work);
> +			return;
> +		}
> +	}
> +}
> +
> +void netif_threaded_napi_add(struct net_device *dev,
> +				struct napi_struct *napi,
> +				int (*poll)(struct napi_struct *, int),
> +				int weight)
> +{
> +	netif_napi_add(dev, napi, poll, weight);
> +	INIT_WORK(&napi->work, napi_workfn);
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool is_threaded_napi(struct napi_struct *n)
> +{
> +	return n->work.func == napi_workfn;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void threaded_napi_sched(struct napi_struct *n)
> +{
> +	if (is_threaded_napi(n))
> +		queue_work(napi_workq, &n->work);
> +	else
> +		____napi_schedule(this_cpu_ptr(&softnet_data), n);
> +}
> +#else
> +static inline void threaded_napi_sched(struct napi_struct *n)
> +{
> +	____napi_schedule(this_cpu_ptr(&softnet_data), n);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
>   /**
>    * __napi_schedule - schedule for receive
>    * @n: entry to schedule
> @@ -6289,7 +6344,7 @@ void __napi_schedule(struct napi_struct
>   	unsigned long flags;
>   
>   	local_irq_save(flags);
> -	____napi_schedule(this_cpu_ptr(&softnet_data), n);
> +	threaded_napi_sched(n);
>   	local_irq_restore(flags);
>   }
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL(__napi_schedule);
> @@ -6335,7 +6390,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(napi_schedule_prep);
>    */
>   void __napi_schedule_irqoff(struct napi_struct *n)
>   {
> -	____napi_schedule(this_cpu_ptr(&softnet_data), n);
> +	threaded_napi_sched(n);
>   }
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL(__napi_schedule_irqoff);
>   
> @@ -10685,6 +10740,10 @@ static int __init net_dev_init(void)
>   		sd->backlog.weight = weight_p;
>   	}
>   
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THREADED_NAPI
> +	napi_workq = alloc_workqueue("napi_workq", WQ_UNBOUND | WQ_HIGHPRI,
> +					    WQ_UNBOUND_MAX_ACTIVE);
> +#endif
>   	dev_boot_phase = 0;
>   
>   	/* The loopback device is special if any other network devices
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ath10k mailing list
> ath10k@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k
>

_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k

  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-25 10:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 96+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-21 17:14 Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 17:14 ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 17:14 ` [RFC 1/7] mac80211: Add check for napi handle before WARN_ON Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 17:14   ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-22 12:56   ` Johannes Berg
2020-07-22 12:56     ` Johannes Berg
2020-07-23 18:26     ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-23 18:26       ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-23 20:06       ` Johannes Berg
2020-07-23 20:06         ` Johannes Berg
2020-07-24  6:21         ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-24  6:21           ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-26 16:19         ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-26 16:19           ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-30 12:40           ` Johannes Berg
2020-07-30 12:40             ` Johannes Berg
2020-07-21 17:14 ` [RFC 2/7] ath10k: Add support to process rx packet in thread Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 17:14   ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 21:53   ` Rajkumar Manoharan
2020-07-21 21:53     ` Rajkumar Manoharan
2020-07-22 12:27     ` Felix Fietkau
2020-07-22 12:27       ` Felix Fietkau
2020-07-22 12:55       ` Johannes Berg
2020-07-22 12:55         ` Johannes Berg
2020-07-22 13:00         ` Felix Fietkau
2020-07-22 13:00           ` Felix Fietkau
2020-07-23  6:09           ` Rajkumar Manoharan
2020-07-23  6:09             ` Rajkumar Manoharan
2021-03-22 23:57           ` Ben Greear
2021-03-22 23:57             ` Ben Greear
2021-03-23  1:20             ` Brian Norris
2021-03-23  1:20               ` Brian Norris
2021-03-23  3:01               ` Ben Greear
2021-03-23  3:01                 ` Ben Greear
2021-03-23  7:45                 ` Felix Fietkau
2021-03-23  7:45                   ` Felix Fietkau
2021-03-25  9:45                   ` Rakesh Pillai
2021-03-25  9:45                     ` Rakesh Pillai
2021-03-25 10:33                     ` Felix Fietkau
2021-03-25 10:33                       ` Felix Fietkau
2020-07-23 18:25     ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-23 18:25       ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-24 23:11       ` Jacob Keller
2020-07-24 23:11         ` Jacob Keller
2020-07-21 17:14 ` [RFC 3/7] ath10k: Add module param to enable rx thread Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 17:14   ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 17:14 ` [RFC 4/7] ath10k: Do not exhaust budget on process tx completion Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 17:14   ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 17:14 ` [RFC 5/7] ath10k: Handle the rx packet processing in thread Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 17:14   ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 17:14 ` [RFC 6/7] ath10k: Add deliver to stack from thread context Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 17:14   ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 17:14 ` [RFC 7/7] ath10k: Handle rx thread suspend and resume Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 17:14   ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-23 23:06   ` Sebastian Gottschall
2020-07-23 23:06     ` Sebastian Gottschall
2020-07-24  6:19     ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-24  6:19       ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-21 17:25 ` [RFC 0/7] Add support to process rx packets in thread Andrew Lunn
2020-07-21 17:25   ` Andrew Lunn
2020-07-21 18:05   ` Florian Fainelli
2020-07-21 18:05     ` Florian Fainelli
2020-07-23 18:21     ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-23 18:21       ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-23 19:02       ` Florian Fainelli
2020-07-23 19:02         ` Florian Fainelli
2020-07-24  6:20         ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-24  6:20           ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-24 22:28           ` Florian Fainelli
2020-07-24 22:28             ` Florian Fainelli
2020-07-22  9:12   ` David Laight
2020-07-22  9:12     ` David Laight
2020-07-25  8:16     ` Hillf Danton
2020-07-25 10:38       ` Sebastian Gottschall [this message]
2020-07-25 10:38         ` Sebastian Gottschall
2020-07-25 12:25         ` Hillf Danton
2020-07-25 14:08         ` Sebastian Gottschall
2020-07-25 14:08           ` Sebastian Gottschall
2020-07-25 14:57           ` Hillf Danton
2020-07-25 15:41             ` Sebastian Gottschall
2020-07-25 15:41               ` Sebastian Gottschall
2020-07-26 11:16               ` David Laight
2020-07-26 11:16                 ` David Laight
2020-07-28 16:59                 ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-28 16:59                   ` Rakesh Pillai
2020-07-29  1:34                   ` Hillf Danton
2020-07-25 17:57       ` Felix Fietkau
2020-07-25 17:57         ` Felix Fietkau
2020-07-26  1:22         ` Hillf Danton
2020-07-26  8:10           ` Felix Fietkau
2020-07-26  8:10             ` Felix Fietkau
2020-07-26  8:32             ` Hillf Danton
2020-07-26  8:59               ` Felix Fietkau
2020-07-26  8:59                 ` Felix Fietkau
2020-07-22 16:20   ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-07-22 16:20     ` Jakub Kicinski

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=8359a849-2b8a-c842-a501-c6cb6966e345@dd-wrt.com \
    --to=s.gottschall@dd-wrt.com \
    --cc=David.Laight@ACULAB.COM \
    --cc=Markus.Elfring@web.de \
    --cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
    --cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dianders@chromium.org \
    --cc=evgreen@chromium.org \
    --cc=hdanton@sina.com \
    --cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pillair@codeaurora.org \
    --subject='Re: [RFC 0/7] Add support to process rx packets in thread' \
    /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

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.