From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-io0-f195.google.com ([209.85.223.195]:35858 "EHLO mail-io0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754015AbcL3OfM (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Dec 2016 09:35:12 -0500 Received: by mail-io0-f195.google.com with SMTP id m204so15938367ioe.3 for ; Fri, 30 Dec 2016 06:35:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <992a4e2676037a06f482cdbe2d3d39e287530be5.1480974623.git.chunkeey@googlemail.com> From: Christian Lamparter Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 15:35:10 +0100 Message-ID: (sfid-20161230_153515_284929_CDAFDEF3) Subject: Re: [1/2] ath10k: add accounting for the extended peer statistics To: Kalle Valo , Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan Cc: linux-wireless , ath10k@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: > Christian Lamparter wrote: >> The 10.4 firmware adds extended peer information to the >> firmware's statistics payload. This additional info is >> stored as a separate data field and the elements are >> stored in their own "peers_extd" list. >> >> These elements can pile up in the same way as the peer >> information elements. This is because the >> ath10k_wmi_10_4_op_pull_fw_stats() function tries to >> pull the same amount (num_peer_stats) for every statistic >> data unit. >> >> Fixes: 4a49ae94a448faa ("ath10k: fix 10.4 extended peer stats update") >> Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter > > My understanding is that I should skip this patch 1. Please let me know if > I misunderstood. But I'm still plannning to apply patch 2. I added Mohammed (I hope, he can reply to the open question when he returns), Since I'm not sure what he wants or not. As far as I'm aware, the "extended" boolean serves no purpose because it was only used in once place in debugfs_sta which was removed in the patch. ( "ath10k_sta_update_stats_rx_duration" and "ath10k_sta_update_extd_stats_rx_duration" have been unified). > Patch set to Changes Requested. Isn't there a: "Waiting for Maintainer" state as well? Otherwise, if nobody has any complains or question: can you please queue it for the next merge window? Regards, Christian > -- > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9461631/ > > Documentation about submitting wireless patches and checking status > from patchwork: > > https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-io0-x244.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4001:c06::244]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.85_2 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1cMyHM-0007X5-5i for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 30 Dec 2016 14:35:33 +0000 Received: by mail-io0-x244.google.com with SMTP id j76so24015784ioe.0 for ; Fri, 30 Dec 2016 06:35:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <992a4e2676037a06f482cdbe2d3d39e287530be5.1480974623.git.chunkeey@googlemail.com> From: Christian Lamparter Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 15:35:10 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [1/2] ath10k: add accounting for the extended peer statistics 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: Kalle Valo , Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan Cc: linux-wireless , ath10k@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: > Christian Lamparter wrote: >> The 10.4 firmware adds extended peer information to the >> firmware's statistics payload. This additional info is >> stored as a separate data field and the elements are >> stored in their own "peers_extd" list. >> >> These elements can pile up in the same way as the peer >> information elements. This is because the >> ath10k_wmi_10_4_op_pull_fw_stats() function tries to >> pull the same amount (num_peer_stats) for every statistic >> data unit. >> >> Fixes: 4a49ae94a448faa ("ath10k: fix 10.4 extended peer stats update") >> Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter > > My understanding is that I should skip this patch 1. Please let me know if > I misunderstood. But I'm still plannning to apply patch 2. I added Mohammed (I hope, he can reply to the open question when he returns), Since I'm not sure what he wants or not. As far as I'm aware, the "extended" boolean serves no purpose because it was only used in once place in debugfs_sta which was removed in the patch. ( "ath10k_sta_update_stats_rx_duration" and "ath10k_sta_update_extd_stats_rx_duration" have been unified). > Patch set to Changes Requested. Isn't there a: "Waiting for Maintainer" state as well? Otherwise, if nobody has any complains or question: can you please queue it for the next merge window? Regards, Christian > -- > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9461631/ > > Documentation about submitting wireless patches and checking status > from patchwork: > > https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches > _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k