2010-11-29 15:28:05

by Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan

Subject: [PATCH] ath9k: Properly use unlikely check macro

From: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan <[email protected]>

AUTOSLEEP feature is enabled only AR9003 and later chips.So unlikely
macro should be used only to check whether auto-sleep feature is enabled

Signed-off-by: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c | 6 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
index 262c815..751ee1b 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
@@ -1743,10 +1743,10 @@ int ath_rx_tasklet(struct ath_softc *sc, int flush, bool hp)
}

spin_lock_irqsave(&sc->sc_pm_lock, flags);
- if (unlikely(ath9k_check_auto_sleep(sc) ||
- (sc->ps_flags & (PS_WAIT_FOR_BEACON |
+ if ((sc->ps_flags & (PS_WAIT_FOR_BEACON |
PS_WAIT_FOR_CAB |
- PS_WAIT_FOR_PSPOLL_DATA))))
+ PS_WAIT_FOR_PSPOLL_DATA)) ||
+ unlikely(ath9k_hw_check_auto_sleep(sc)))
ath_rx_ps(sc, skb);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sc->sc_pm_lock, flags);

--
1.7.0.4

2010-12-03 15:08:22

by Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan

Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath9k: Properly use unlikely check macro

On Friday 03 December 2010 08:29 PM, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 10:14:07AM +0530, Mohammed Shafi wrote:
>
>> On Friday 03 December 2010 01:51 AM, John W. Linville wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 08:57:57PM +0530, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
>>>
>>>> From: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan<[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>> AUTOSLEEP feature is enabled only AR9003 and later chips.So unlikely
>>>> macro should be used only to check whether auto-sleep feature is enabled
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan<[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c | 6 +++---
>>>> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
>>>> index 262c815..751ee1b 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
>>>> @@ -1743,10 +1743,10 @@ int ath_rx_tasklet(struct ath_softc *sc, int flush, bool hp)
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> spin_lock_irqsave(&sc->sc_pm_lock, flags);
>>>> - if (unlikely(ath9k_check_auto_sleep(sc) ||
>>>> - (sc->ps_flags& (PS_WAIT_FOR_BEACON |
>>>> + if ((sc->ps_flags& (PS_WAIT_FOR_BEACON |
>>>> PS_WAIT_FOR_CAB |
>>>> - PS_WAIT_FOR_PSPOLL_DATA))))
>>>> + PS_WAIT_FOR_PSPOLL_DATA)) ||
>>>> + unlikely(ath9k_hw_check_auto_sleep(sc)))
>>>> ath_rx_ps(sc, skb);
>>>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sc->sc_pm_lock, flags);
>>>>
>>> What tree is this against?
>>>
>> 2.6.37-rc4 ..Any problems in applying.Do I have to resend it based
>> on the latest pull ?
>>
> Did you compile it?
>
> /home/linville/git/linux-2.6
> [linville-8530p.local]:> git describe
> v2.6.37-rc4
>
> /home/linville/git/linux-2.6
> [linville-8530p.local]:> grep ath9k_hw_check_auto_sleep drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/*
>
Sorry for the trouble John please ignore that patch.I apologize for not
compiling it.I will send a v2 patch over the latest pull.

> John
>

2010-12-03 04:44:18

by Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan

Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath9k: Properly use unlikely check macro

On Friday 03 December 2010 01:51 AM, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 08:57:57PM +0530, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
>
>> From: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan<[email protected]>
>>
>> AUTOSLEEP feature is enabled only AR9003 and later chips.So unlikely
>> macro should be used only to check whether auto-sleep feature is enabled
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan<[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c | 6 +++---
>> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
>> index 262c815..751ee1b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
>> @@ -1743,10 +1743,10 @@ int ath_rx_tasklet(struct ath_softc *sc, int flush, bool hp)
>> }
>>
>> spin_lock_irqsave(&sc->sc_pm_lock, flags);
>> - if (unlikely(ath9k_check_auto_sleep(sc) ||
>> - (sc->ps_flags& (PS_WAIT_FOR_BEACON |
>> + if ((sc->ps_flags& (PS_WAIT_FOR_BEACON |
>> PS_WAIT_FOR_CAB |
>> - PS_WAIT_FOR_PSPOLL_DATA))))
>> + PS_WAIT_FOR_PSPOLL_DATA)) ||
>> + unlikely(ath9k_hw_check_auto_sleep(sc)))
>> ath_rx_ps(sc, skb);
>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sc->sc_pm_lock, flags);
>>
> What tree is this against?
>
2.6.37-rc4 ..Any problems in applying.Do I have to resend it based on
the latest pull ?
thanks,
shafi

2010-12-03 15:24:22

by Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan

Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath9k: Properly use unlikely check macro

On Friday 03 December 2010 08:29 PM, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 10:14:07AM +0530, Mohammed Shafi wrote:
>
>> On Friday 03 December 2010 01:51 AM, John W. Linville wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 08:57:57PM +0530, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
>>>
>>>> From: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan<[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>> AUTOSLEEP feature is enabled only AR9003 and later chips.So unlikely
>>>> macro should be used only to check whether auto-sleep feature is enabled
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan<[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c | 6 +++---
>>>> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
>>>> index 262c815..751ee1b 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
>>>> @@ -1743,10 +1743,10 @@ int ath_rx_tasklet(struct ath_softc *sc, int flush, bool hp)
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> spin_lock_irqsave(&sc->sc_pm_lock, flags);
>>>> - if (unlikely(ath9k_check_auto_sleep(sc) ||
>>>> - (sc->ps_flags& (PS_WAIT_FOR_BEACON |
>>>> + if ((sc->ps_flags& (PS_WAIT_FOR_BEACON |
>>>> PS_WAIT_FOR_CAB |
>>>> - PS_WAIT_FOR_PSPOLL_DATA))))
>>>> + PS_WAIT_FOR_PSPOLL_DATA)) ||
>>>> + unlikely(ath9k_hw_check_auto_sleep(sc)))
>>>>
The function is 'ath9k_check_auto_sleep' not
'ath9k_hw_check_auto_sleep'.Sorry for the trouble.
>>>> ath_rx_ps(sc, skb);
>>>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sc->sc_pm_lock, flags);
>>>>
>>> What tree is this against?
>>>
>> 2.6.37-rc4 ..Any problems in applying.Do I have to resend it based
>> on the latest pull ?
>>
> Did you compile it?
>
> /home/linville/git/linux-2.6
> [linville-8530p.local]:> git describe
> v2.6.37-rc4
>
> /home/linville/git/linux-2.6
> [linville-8530p.local]:> grep ath9k_hw_check_auto_sleep drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/*
>
> John
>

2010-12-02 20:30:11

by John W. Linville

Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath9k: Properly use unlikely check macro

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 08:57:57PM +0530, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
> From: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan <[email protected]>
>
> AUTOSLEEP feature is enabled only AR9003 and later chips.So unlikely
> macro should be used only to check whether auto-sleep feature is enabled
>
> Signed-off-by: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c | 6 +++---
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
> index 262c815..751ee1b 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
> @@ -1743,10 +1743,10 @@ int ath_rx_tasklet(struct ath_softc *sc, int flush, bool hp)
> }
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&sc->sc_pm_lock, flags);
> - if (unlikely(ath9k_check_auto_sleep(sc) ||
> - (sc->ps_flags & (PS_WAIT_FOR_BEACON |
> + if ((sc->ps_flags & (PS_WAIT_FOR_BEACON |
> PS_WAIT_FOR_CAB |
> - PS_WAIT_FOR_PSPOLL_DATA))))
> + PS_WAIT_FOR_PSPOLL_DATA)) ||
> + unlikely(ath9k_hw_check_auto_sleep(sc)))
> ath_rx_ps(sc, skb);
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sc->sc_pm_lock, flags);

What tree is this against?

--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
[email protected] might be all we have. Be ready.

2010-12-03 15:00:07

by John W. Linville

Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath9k: Properly use unlikely check macro

On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 10:14:07AM +0530, Mohammed Shafi wrote:
> On Friday 03 December 2010 01:51 AM, John W. Linville wrote:
> >On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 08:57:57PM +0530, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
> >>From: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan<[email protected]>
> >>
> >>AUTOSLEEP feature is enabled only AR9003 and later chips.So unlikely
> >>macro should be used only to check whether auto-sleep feature is enabled
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan<[email protected]>
> >>---
> >> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c | 6 +++---
> >> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
> >>index 262c815..751ee1b 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
> >>+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/recv.c
> >>@@ -1743,10 +1743,10 @@ int ath_rx_tasklet(struct ath_softc *sc, int flush, bool hp)
> >> }
> >>
> >> spin_lock_irqsave(&sc->sc_pm_lock, flags);
> >>- if (unlikely(ath9k_check_auto_sleep(sc) ||
> >>- (sc->ps_flags& (PS_WAIT_FOR_BEACON |
> >>+ if ((sc->ps_flags& (PS_WAIT_FOR_BEACON |
> >> PS_WAIT_FOR_CAB |
> >>- PS_WAIT_FOR_PSPOLL_DATA))))
> >>+ PS_WAIT_FOR_PSPOLL_DATA)) ||
> >>+ unlikely(ath9k_hw_check_auto_sleep(sc)))
> >> ath_rx_ps(sc, skb);
> >> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sc->sc_pm_lock, flags);
> >What tree is this against?
> 2.6.37-rc4 ..Any problems in applying.Do I have to resend it based
> on the latest pull ?

Did you compile it?

/home/linville/git/linux-2.6
[linville-8530p.local]:> git describe
v2.6.37-rc4

/home/linville/git/linux-2.6
[linville-8530p.local]:> grep ath9k_hw_check_auto_sleep drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/*

John
--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
[email protected] might be all we have. Be ready.