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 BCAAACA9EAF for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 09:40:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E9A02166E for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 09:40:29 +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="IUSCoPlf"; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="EO3iRyBJ" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2391046AbfJXJk3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Oct 2019 05:40:29 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:35558 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727275AbfJXJk2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Oct 2019 05:40:28 -0400 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 878A061069; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 09:40:26 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1571910027; bh=RpzuRCtxTdpM4TGsOHhiUmecfsb9FisvPIpB9QSVE7w=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=IUSCoPlfTKRm3mqrUXs0r0dkJuoMehYvPtJIDNv0AoNxM4xuRC8z+lZ8/ECcZs2wn fB2rAma8LIROH35VK1gb4o4S8FtDCP/YaGAmrMhmDdqYT3qQeE9kU5Qn0qclhKAw1M 5cfh399V9o7b/VcHLy96GiJ+LhG89ys7CNKhBhW0= Received: from mail.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 068CD6135A; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 09:40:26 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1571910026; bh=RpzuRCtxTdpM4TGsOHhiUmecfsb9FisvPIpB9QSVE7w=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=EO3iRyBJhIHdc5BGNEaeEcAAESxwhomaOc6oQbg3Vl7M3FYHT8robYoL3dd4ymdjE O/THd85vxj2C6utsg3rX5ZnyTehRINtZiMIjT4Ob3yvTRHqOWmJmbs1A5LBe/2la1s TdH9XUBvvFHh5ImRfBd6+tiqbaOGzv7G2J5aYsc4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 17:40:25 +0800 From: Wen Gong To: Kalle Valo 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 In-Reply-To: <87r232sdeh.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> 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> Message-ID: X-Sender: wgong@codeaurora.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.2.5 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org 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); > > Please clarify and I can update the commit log.