From: Lingbo Kong <quic_lingbok@quicinc.com>
To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>
Cc: <ath12k@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] wifi: ath12k: report station mode transmit rate
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 19:41:56 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9108c1fc-8528-4c79-a401-a0526e7ebea6@quicinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87v844qsih.fsf@kernel.org>
On 2024/4/26 19:21, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Lingbo Kong <quic_lingbok@quicinc.com> writes:
>
>> On 2024/4/26 0:54, Kalle Valo wrote:
>>> Lingbo Kong <quic_lingbok@quicinc.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> +static void ath12k_dp_tx_update_txcompl(struct ath12k *ar, struct
>>>> hal_tx_status *ts)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct ath12k_base *ab = ar->ab;
>>>> + struct ath12k_peer *peer;
>>>> + struct ath12k_sta *arsta;
>>>> + struct ieee80211_sta *sta;
>>>> + u16 rate;
>>>> + u8 rate_idx = 0;
>>>> + int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + spin_lock_bh(&ab->base_lock);
>>>
>>> Did you analyse how this function, and especially taking the
>>> base_lock,
>>> affects performance?
>>
>> The base_lock is used here because of the need to look for peers based
>> on the ts->peer_id when calling ath12k_peer_find_by_id() function,
>> which i think might affect performance.
>>
>> Do i need to run a throughput test?
>
> Ok, so to answer my question: no, you didn't do any performance
> analysis. Throughput test might not be enough, for example the driver
> can be used on slower systems and running the test on a fast CPU might
> not reveal any problem. A proper analysis would be much better.
>
hi, kalle,
i found that ab->base_lock is used in a lot of places in ath12k, so it's
complicated to do performance analysis in here.
Do you have any suggestions? I would appreciate your suggestions:)
/lingbo kong
>>>> +enum nl80211_he_ru_alloc
>>>> ath12k_mac_he_ru_tones_to_nl80211_he_ru_alloc(u16 ru_tones)
>>>> +{
>>>> + enum nl80211_he_ru_alloc ret;
>>>> +
>>>> + switch (ru_tones) {
>>>> + case 26:
>>>> + ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_26;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case 52:
>>>> + ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_52;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case 106:
>>>> + ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_106;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case 242:
>>>> + ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_242;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case 484:
>>>> + ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_484;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case 996:
>>>> + ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_996;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + case (996 * 2):
>>>> + ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_2x996;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_26;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> +}
>>> How does this function compare to
>>> ath12k_he_ru_tones_to_nl80211_he_ru_alloc()?
>>>
>>
>> ath12k_mac_he_ru_tones_to_nl80211_he_ru_alloc() is different from
>> ath12k_he_ru_tones_to_nl80211_he_ru_alloc().
>>
>> the logic of ath12k_he_ru_tones_to_nl80211_he_ru_alloc() is
>
> Sure, I can read C. But _why_ do we have two very similar but still
> different functions. That looks fishy to me.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-30 11:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-19 3:21 [PATCH v4 0/3] wifi: ath12k: report station mode stats Lingbo Kong
2024-04-19 3:21 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] wifi: ath12k: report station mode transmit rate Lingbo Kong
2024-04-25 10:37 ` Kalle Valo
2024-04-26 8:01 ` Lingbo Kong
2024-04-26 11:24 ` Kalle Valo
2024-05-07 11:06 ` Lingbo Kong
2024-04-25 16:54 ` Kalle Valo
2024-04-26 6:41 ` Lingbo Kong
2024-04-26 11:21 ` Kalle Valo
2024-04-30 11:41 ` Lingbo Kong [this message]
2024-04-29 9:11 ` Karthikeyan Periyasamy
2024-04-29 9:29 ` Lingbo Kong
2024-04-19 3:21 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] wifi: ath12k: report station mode receive rate for IEEE 802.11be Lingbo Kong
2024-04-19 3:21 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] wifi: ath12k: report station mode signal strength Lingbo Kong
2024-04-25 17:03 ` Kalle Valo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9108c1fc-8528-4c79-a401-a0526e7ebea6@quicinc.com \
--to=quic_lingbok@quicinc.com \
--cc=ath12k@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=kvalo@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).