From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEA1FCA9EAF for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 10:14:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B134A20663 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 10:14:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="c3nWcXIq"; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="nv2VlTVk" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2392429AbfJXKOf (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Oct 2019 06:14:35 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:44238 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2391807AbfJXKOe (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Oct 2019 06:14:34 -0400 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0809F61178; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 10:14:32 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1571912073; bh=rcfSs8cIFoejkuawLusYRRabpv0SXzEfJdHxkao3oJQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=c3nWcXIqfVsWoDucmPC78r0AGl0HFH5+RELmlgwkDQVTgVYOIonaIe3DW43TlcNyo yiZVutyAZpzBj+t1nO2hhasVH25nCbqpvRL7h9KSTysraHbPWLufYkcGx0SSaoyV6f 5dcXH96rYRN73MDGEfyY7iuGW/RJ4wrFL3YswEiM= Received: from potku.adurom.net (unknown [88.114.240.156]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: kvalo@smtp.codeaurora.org) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 52C8660EE7; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 10:14:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1571912071; bh=rcfSs8cIFoejkuawLusYRRabpv0SXzEfJdHxkao3oJQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=nv2VlTVklRB0f47dEn9xpK0n1yk5u7HJhj98WKUPFF8C8SkdRUZyarziDeQQNErfB ld/7vV8Y/42onlrmVhPd4K0Z/8BvXdVNotbA7rux8FS3cS721XK6jqyAeS08ERWPB+ 1T3bLNAS0LqAWpRdaWdtPKmpyVn7h5fxaU2rGpa4= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 52C8660EE7 Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=kvalo@codeaurora.org From: Kalle Valo To: Wen Gong Cc: ath10k@lists.infradead.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] ath10k: change max RX bundle size from 8 to 32 for sdio References: <1569402639-31720-1-git-send-email-wgong@codeaurora.org> <1569402639-31720-3-git-send-email-wgong@codeaurora.org> <87r232sdeh.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 13:14:27 +0300 In-Reply-To: (Wen Gong's message of "Thu, 24 Oct 2019 17:40:25 +0800") Message-ID: <87d0emsb5o.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Wen Gong writes: > On 2019-10-24 17:25, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Wen Gong writes: >> >>> The max bundle size support by firmware is 32, change it from 8 to 32 >>> will help performance. This results in significant performance >>> improvement on RX path. >>> >>> Tested with QCA6174 SDIO with firmware >>> WLAN.RMH.4.4.1-00017-QCARMSWPZ-1 >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Wen Gong >>> --- >>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htc.h | 12 +++++++++--- >>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.c | 4 ++-- >>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.h | 4 ++-- >>> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htc.h >>> b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htc.h >>> index f55d3ca..7055156 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htc.h >>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htc.h >>> @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ >>> * 4-byte aligned. >>> */ >>> >>> -#define HTC_HOST_MAX_MSG_PER_RX_BUNDLE 8 >>> +#define HTC_HOST_MAX_MSG_PER_RX_BUNDLE 32 >> >> So how do I know that this change doesn't break any other hardware? I >> did a quick review and I think it's safe, but the commit log mentions >> nothing about this. > > the real max rx bundle is decided in ath10k_htc_wait_target. > it is the min value of HTC_HOST_MAX_MSG_PER_RX_BUNDLE and the value > reported from firmware. > htc->max_msgs_per_htc_bundle = > min_t(u8, msg->ready_ext.max_msgs_per_htc_bundle, > HTC_HOST_MAX_MSG_PER_RX_BUNDLE); And we assume that no other firmware than QCA6174 SDIO uses value bigger than 8? Because if there is a such firmware using, for example, value 9 this might cause a regression. Anyway, I added this comment to the commit log: The real max rx bundle is decided in ath10k_htc_wait_target(), it is the min value of HTC_HOST_MAX_MSG_PER_RX_BUNDLE and the value reported from firmware. So this change shouldn't cause any regressions with other hardware supported by ath10k. -- https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1iNa8X-00056p-2s for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 10:14:34 +0000 From: Kalle Valo Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] ath10k: change max RX bundle size from 8 to 32 for sdio References: <1569402639-31720-1-git-send-email-wgong@codeaurora.org> <1569402639-31720-3-git-send-email-wgong@codeaurora.org> <87r232sdeh.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 13:14:27 +0300 In-Reply-To: (Wen Gong's message of "Thu, 24 Oct 2019 17:40:25 +0800") Message-ID: <87d0emsb5o.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: Wen Gong Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath10k@lists.infradead.org Wen Gong writes: > On 2019-10-24 17:25, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Wen Gong writes: >> >>> The max bundle size support by firmware is 32, change it from 8 to 32 >>> will help performance. This results in significant performance >>> improvement on RX path. >>> >>> Tested with QCA6174 SDIO with firmware >>> WLAN.RMH.4.4.1-00017-QCARMSWPZ-1 >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Wen Gong >>> --- >>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htc.h | 12 +++++++++--- >>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.c | 4 ++-- >>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.h | 4 ++-- >>> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htc.h >>> b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htc.h >>> index f55d3ca..7055156 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htc.h >>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htc.h >>> @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ >>> * 4-byte aligned. >>> */ >>> >>> -#define HTC_HOST_MAX_MSG_PER_RX_BUNDLE 8 >>> +#define HTC_HOST_MAX_MSG_PER_RX_BUNDLE 32 >> >> So how do I know that this change doesn't break any other hardware? I >> did a quick review and I think it's safe, but the commit log mentions >> nothing about this. > > the real max rx bundle is decided in ath10k_htc_wait_target. > it is the min value of HTC_HOST_MAX_MSG_PER_RX_BUNDLE and the value > reported from firmware. > htc->max_msgs_per_htc_bundle = > min_t(u8, msg->ready_ext.max_msgs_per_htc_bundle, > HTC_HOST_MAX_MSG_PER_RX_BUNDLE); And we assume that no other firmware than QCA6174 SDIO uses value bigger than 8? Because if there is a such firmware using, for example, value 9 this might cause a regression. Anyway, I added this comment to the commit log: The real max rx bundle is decided in ath10k_htc_wait_target(), it is the min value of HTC_HOST_MAX_MSG_PER_RX_BUNDLE and the value reported from firmware. So this change shouldn't cause any regressions with other hardware supported by ath10k. -- https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k