[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1495026867.2442.9.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 15:14:27 +0200
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@....qualcomm.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Cc: "k.eugene.e@...il.com" <k.eugene.e@...il.com>,
Andy Gross <andy.gross@...aro.org>,
David Brown <david.brown@...aro.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-soc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"wcn36xx@...ts.infradead.org" <wcn36xx@...ts.infradead.org>,
"nicolas.dechesne@...aro.org" <nicolas.dechesne@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] wcn36xx: Pass used skb to ieee80211_tx_status()
On Thu, 2017-05-04 at 13:13 +0000, Kalle Valo wrote:
>
> > > This code intentionally checked if TX status was requested, and
> > > if not then it doesn't go to the effort of building it.
> > >
> >
> > What I'm finding puzzling is the fact that the only caller of
> > ieee80211_led_tx() is ieee80211_tx_status() and it seems like
> > drivers, such as ath10k, call this for each packet handled - but
> > I'm likely missing something.
Yes, many drivers do call it for each packet, and as such, this
deficiency was never noted.
> > > As it is with your patch, it'll go and report the TX status
> > > without any
> > > TX status information - which is handled in
> > > wcn36xx_dxe_tx_ack_ind()
> > > for those frames needing it.
> > >
> >
> > Right, it doesn't sound desired. However, during normal operation
> > I'm not seeing IEEE80211_TX_CTL_REQ_TX_STATUS being set and as such
> > ieee80211_led_tx() is never called.
>
> So what's the conclusion? How do we get leds working?
Well, frankly, I never thought the TX LED was a super good idea - but
it had been supported by the original code IIRC, so never removed. Some
people like frantic blinking I guess ;-)
But I think the problem also applies to the throughput trigger thing,
so perhaps we need to stick some LED feedback calls into other places,
like _noskb() or provide an extra way to do it?
johannes
Powered by blists - more mailing lists