From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail.toke.dk ([52.28.52.200]:36221 "EHLO mail.toke.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752745AbeGCOgT (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2018 10:36:19 -0400 From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= To: Johannes Berg , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Cc: Felix Fietkau Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: don't put null-data frames on the normal TXQ In-Reply-To: <1530628340.4735.29.camel@sipsolutions.net> References: <20180703124725.30917-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net> <87601wfl1u.fsf@toke.dk> <1530628340.4735.29.camel@sipsolutions.net> Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 16:36:12 +0200 Message-ID: <8736x0fktf.fsf@toke.dk> (sfid-20180703_163623_475588_DDC65CDD) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Johannes Berg writes: > On Tue, 2018-07-03 at 16:31 +0200, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen wrote: >> Johannes Berg writes: >>=20 >> > From: Johannes Berg >> >=20 >> > Since (QoS) NDP frames shouldn't be put into aggregation nor are >> > assigned real sequence numbers, etc. it's better to treat them as >> > non-data packets and not put them on the normal TXQs, for example >> > when building A-MPDUs they need to be treated specially, and they >> > are more used for management (e.g. to see if the station is alive) >> > anyway. >>=20 >> No objections to this per se; > > :-) > >> but didn't we want to move towards >> everything going through the TXQs? Any progress on that front? :) > > Not really. Yes, I wanted to, but it's some massive surgery. Right now > I'm working on converting iwlwifi, perhaps I'll learn about it more > and can then do the mac80211 surgery better later. Right, sounds good! Looking forward to the iwlwifi conversion :) -Toke