From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail.toke.dk ([52.28.52.200]:57079 "EHLO mail.toke.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725890AbeIERUw (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Sep 2018 13:20:52 -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: TDLS: fix skb queue/priority assignment In-Reply-To: <1536150812.3528.15.camel@sipsolutions.net> References: <20180905113402.7665-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net> <1536147453.3528.11.camel@sipsolutions.net> <87k1o05g04.fsf@toke.dk> <1536147683.3528.12.camel@sipsolutions.net> <1536147865.3528.14.camel@sipsolutions.net> <87efe8yvju.fsf@toke.dk> <1536150812.3528.15.camel@sipsolutions.net> Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2018 14:50:41 +0200 Message-ID: <87bm9cyuou.fsf@toke.dk> (sfid-20180905_145046_447987_557F85BD) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Johannes Berg writes: > On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 14:32 +0200, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen wrote: >> Johannes Berg writes: >>=20 >> > On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 13:41 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: >> > > On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 13:40 +0200, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen = wrote: >> > > >=20 >> > > > Guess we'll have to deal with everything else if we ever move mana= gement >> > > > frames onto the TXQ path as well... >> > >=20 >> > > Depends on whether we care for management frame priorities or not ..= . so >> > > far we haven't really. >> >=20 >> > Actually, for the most part we have implemented that properly. Except >> > for the TXQ I added for bufferable management ... oh well, I think we'= re >> > the only user thereof now. >> >=20 >> > I'm not sure we want to have a TXQ per TID for management, that seems >> > overkill. But I'm also not sure how to solve this otherwise ... >>=20 >> Graft it to an existing TXQ, similar to how the fragments queue is used >> now? Saves a TXQ at the expense of having to special-case it... > > The problem isn't so much how we handle it in mac80211 for the queueing, > but how we deal with things like A-MSDU and how we present it to the > driver ... for iwlwifi at least we'd really like to have only data > frames so we can map it directly to the hardware queue ... Ah, I see. No, then just putting them at the head of a different TXQ probably won't work... Are you mapping TXQs to hardware queues dynamically as they empty and re-fill? Presumably you'll have cases where you don't have enough HWQs? -Toke