With the new tx status API: "mac80211: implement wifi TX status"
All skb originating from mac80211 needs to be given back to mac80211.
Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter <[email protected]>
---
It's high time we change all calls in the tx-path from
dev_kfree_skb into ieee80211_free_txskb.
The call in ath9k_tx is straightforward, but the one in
ath_tx_setup_buffer gives me headaches. I'm not sure if
we even need to check bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd at this
stage since ath_tx_start_dma sets bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd
"after" calling ath_tx_setup_buffer?!
Regards,
Chr
---
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c | 2 +-
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c | 6 +++++-
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
index c81304d..4471ed9 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
@@ -1162,7 +1162,7 @@ static void ath9k_tx(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb)
return;
exit:
- dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
+ ieee80211_free_txskb(sc->hw, skb);
}
static void ath9k_stop(struct ieee80211_hw *hw)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c
index 3182408..0dadbc3 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c
@@ -1858,7 +1858,11 @@ static struct ath_buf *ath_tx_setup_buffer(struct ath_softc *sc,
return bf;
error:
- dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
+
+ if (bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd)
+ dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
+ else
+ ieee80211_free_txskb(sc->hw, skb);
return NULL;
}
--
1.7.9.1
With the new tx status API: "mac80211: implement wifi TX status"
All skb originating from mac80211 needs to be given back to mac80211.
Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter <[email protected]>
---
It compiles, but not tested.
---
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc_drv_txrx.c | 4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc_drv_txrx.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc_drv_txrx.c
index 3e40a64..e958704 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc_drv_txrx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc_drv_txrx.c
@@ -451,7 +451,7 @@ static void ath9k_htc_tx_process(struct ath9k_htc_priv *priv,
slot = strip_drv_header(priv, skb);
if (slot < 0) {
- dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
+ ieee80211_free_txskb(priv->hw, skb);
return;
}
@@ -687,7 +687,7 @@ void ath9k_htc_txep(void *drv_priv, struct sk_buff *skb,
epid_queue = get_htc_epid_queue(priv, ep_id);
if (!epid_queue) {
- dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
+ ieee80211_free_txskb(priv->hw, skb);
return;
}
--
1.7.9.1
On Thursday 01 March 2012 11:09 AM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
> Hi Christian,
>
> On Monday 27 February 2012 09:40 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote:
>> With the new tx status API: "mac80211: implement wifi TX status"
>> All skb originating from mac80211 needs to be given back to mac80211.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter<[email protected]>
>> ---
>> It's high time we change all calls in the tx-path from
>> dev_kfree_skb into ieee80211_free_txskb.
>>
>> The call in ath9k_tx is straightforward, but the one in
>> ath_tx_setup_buffer gives me headaches. I'm not sure if
>> we even need to check bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd at this
>> stage since ath_tx_start_dma sets bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd
>> "after" calling ath_tx_setup_buffer?!
>
> yes, i think its a problem, we cannot exactly say its the skb from
> mac80211 (or) its our PAPRD skb. though with the current code(as the
> PAPRD) is disabled the skb would be always from mac80211. let us see if
> we have some good solution.
got some idea, need to make sure this works perfectly, paprd frames are
not aggregated, so we can look only at the non-aggregated path.
lets ignore aggregated path:
*ath_tx_form_aggr
*ath_tx_send_ampdu
non-aggregated path :
*ath_tx_start_dma
*ath_send_normal
-> 'ath_tx_setup_buffer' called from 'ath_tx_start_dma' can have a
'is_paprd' check based on 'txctl->paprd' which holds which chain we are
sending PAPRD frame.
-> 'ath_send_normal' called from
-ath_tx_start_dma ( then 'bf' should
be valid and we would not have called 'ath_tx_setup_buffer'
-ath_tx_flush_tid ( which is an aggregation path) ignore it.
attached rough patch for ath9k, need to be compiled and tested. i will
also analyze if this can be done in a better way or any flaws in it
>>
>> Regards,
>> Chr
>> ---
>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c | 6 +++++-
>> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
>> b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
>> index c81304d..4471ed9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
>> @@ -1162,7 +1162,7 @@ static void ath9k_tx(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
>> struct sk_buff *skb)
>>
>> return;
>> exit:
>> - dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
>> + ieee80211_free_txskb(sc->hw, skb);
>> }
>>
>> static void ath9k_stop(struct ieee80211_hw *hw)
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c
>> b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c
>> index 3182408..0dadbc3 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c
>> @@ -1858,7 +1858,11 @@ static struct ath_buf
>> *ath_tx_setup_buffer(struct ath_softc *sc,
>> return bf;
>>
>> error:
>> - dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
>> +
>> + if (bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd)
>> + dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
>> + else
>> + ieee80211_free_txskb(sc->hw, skb);
>> return NULL;
>> }
>>
>
>
--
thanks,
shafi
Hi Christian,
On Monday 27 February 2012 09:40 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> With the new tx status API: "mac80211: implement wifi TX status"
> All skb originating from mac80211 needs to be given back to mac80211.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter<[email protected]>
> ---
> It's high time we change all calls in the tx-path from
> dev_kfree_skb into ieee80211_free_txskb.
>
> The call in ath9k_tx is straightforward, but the one in
> ath_tx_setup_buffer gives me headaches. I'm not sure if
> we even need to check bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd at this
> stage since ath_tx_start_dma sets bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd
> "after" calling ath_tx_setup_buffer?!
yes, i think its a problem, we cannot exactly say its the skb from
mac80211 (or) its our PAPRD skb. though with the current code(as the
PAPRD) is disabled the skb would be always from mac80211. let us see if
we have some good solution.
>
> Regards,
> Chr
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c | 2 +-
> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c | 6 +++++-
> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
> index c81304d..4471ed9 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
> @@ -1162,7 +1162,7 @@ static void ath9k_tx(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb)
>
> return;
> exit:
> - dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
> + ieee80211_free_txskb(sc->hw, skb);
> }
>
> static void ath9k_stop(struct ieee80211_hw *hw)
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c
> index 3182408..0dadbc3 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/xmit.c
> @@ -1858,7 +1858,11 @@ static struct ath_buf *ath_tx_setup_buffer(struct ath_softc *sc,
> return bf;
>
> error:
> - dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
> +
> + if (bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd)
> + dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
> + else
> + ieee80211_free_txskb(sc->hw, skb);
> return NULL;
> }
>
--
thanks,
shafi
>> would you like me to test this patch,
> ? Sure, I would like someone with a AR9300+ to test the patch.
> Currently, I'm stuck with a puny AR9287 [in a router].
> So, I can't run tests all day :(.
>
>> i can just ran a bidirectional traffic test parallel y enabling
>> PAPRD,with this proposed patch.
> Actually, the changes are all within ath9k's tx error paths. So,
> I'm afraid just continuous traffic testing won't do, unless of course
> you can churn out all sorts of tx (dma) errors at the same time.
yes, i can just a start stress test that can run few days in a noisy
channel, with the AR9300 card.
>
> Regards,
> Chr
--
thanks,
shafi
On Monday, March 05, 2012 04:01:17 PM Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
> ping
pong !
> On Thursday 01 March 2012 07:16 PM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
> > On Thursday 01 March 2012 05:12 PM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
> >> On Thursday 01 March 2012 11:09 AM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
> >>> Hi Christian,
> >>>
> >>> On Monday 27 February 2012 09:40 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> >>>> With the new tx status API: "mac80211: implement wifi TX status"
> >>>> All skb originating from mac80211 needs to be given back to mac80211.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter<[email protected]>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> It's high time we change all calls in the tx-path from
> >>>> dev_kfree_skb into ieee80211_free_txskb.
> >>>>
> >>>> The call in ath9k_tx is straightforward, but the one in
> >>>> ath_tx_setup_buffer gives me headaches. I'm not sure if
> >>>> we even need to check bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd at this
> >>>> stage since ath_tx_start_dma sets bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd
> >>>> "after" calling ath_tx_setup_buffer?!
> >>>
> >>> yes, i think its a problem, we cannot exactly say its the skb from
> >>> mac80211 (or) its our PAPRD skb. though with the current code(as the
> >>> PAPRD) is disabled the skb would be always from mac80211. let us see if
> >>> we have some good solution.
> >>
> >>
> >> got some idea, need to make sure this works perfectly, paprd frames are
> >> not aggregated, so we can look only at the non-aggregated path.
> >>
> >> lets ignore aggregated path:
> >>
> >> *ath_tx_form_aggr
> >> *ath_tx_send_ampdu
> >>
> >>
> >> non-aggregated path :
> >>
> >> *ath_tx_start_dma
> >> *ath_send_normal
> >>
> >> -> 'ath_tx_setup_buffer' called from 'ath_tx_start_dma' can have a
> >> 'is_paprd' check based on 'txctl->paprd' which holds which chain we are
> >> sending PAPRD frame.
> >>
> >> -> 'ath_send_normal' called from
> >> -ath_tx_start_dma ( then 'bf' should be valid and we would not have
> >> called 'ath_tx_setup_buffer'
> >> -ath_tx_flush_tid ( which is an aggregation path) ignore it.
> >>
> >>
> >> attached rough patch for ath9k, need to be compiled and tested. i will
> >> also analyze if this can be done in a better way or any flaws in it
> >>
> >
> > compilation fails with previous patch, forgot to declare the field in
> > the declaration, attached patch passes compilation.
> >
> >
>
> would you like me to test this patch,
? Sure, I would like someone with a AR9300+ to test the patch.
Currently, I'm stuck with a puny AR9287 [in a router].
So, I can't run tests all day :(.
> i can just ran a bidirectional traffic test parallel y enabling
> PAPRD,with this proposed patch.
Actually, the changes are all within ath9k's tx error paths. So,
I'm afraid just continuous traffic testing won't do, unless of course
you can churn out all sorts of tx (dma) errors at the same time.
Regards,
Chr
Hi Christian,
On Monday 27 February 2012 10:02 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> With the new tx status API: "mac80211: implement wifi TX status"
> All skb originating from mac80211 needs to be given back to mac80211.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter<[email protected]>
> ---
> It compiles, but not tested.
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc_drv_txrx.c | 4 ++--
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc_drv_txrx.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc_drv_txrx.c
> index 3e40a64..e958704 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc_drv_txrx.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc_drv_txrx.c
> @@ -451,7 +451,7 @@ static void ath9k_htc_tx_process(struct ath9k_htc_priv *priv,
>
> slot = strip_drv_header(priv, skb);
> if (slot< 0) {
> - dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
> + ieee80211_free_txskb(priv->hw, skb);
> return;
> }
>
> @@ -687,7 +687,7 @@ void ath9k_htc_txep(void *drv_priv, struct sk_buff *skb,
>
> epid_queue = get_htc_epid_queue(priv, ep_id);
> if (!epid_queue) {
> - dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
> + ieee80211_free_txskb(priv->hw, skb);
> return;
> }
>
also we should do it ath9k_htc_tx in htc_drv_main.c, i don't know very
much about ath9k_htc.
--
thanks,
shafi
Hi Christian,
ping
On Thursday 01 March 2012 07:16 PM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
> On Thursday 01 March 2012 05:12 PM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
>> On Thursday 01 March 2012 11:09 AM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
>>> Hi Christian,
>>>
>>> On Monday 27 February 2012 09:40 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote:
>>>> With the new tx status API: "mac80211: implement wifi TX status"
>>>> All skb originating from mac80211 needs to be given back to mac80211.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter<[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> It's high time we change all calls in the tx-path from
>>>> dev_kfree_skb into ieee80211_free_txskb.
>>>>
>>>> The call in ath9k_tx is straightforward, but the one in
>>>> ath_tx_setup_buffer gives me headaches. I'm not sure if
>>>> we even need to check bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd at this
>>>> stage since ath_tx_start_dma sets bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd
>>>> "after" calling ath_tx_setup_buffer?!
>>>
>>> yes, i think its a problem, we cannot exactly say its the skb from
>>> mac80211 (or) its our PAPRD skb. though with the current code(as the
>>> PAPRD) is disabled the skb would be always from mac80211. let us see if
>>> we have some good solution.
>>
>>
>> got some idea, need to make sure this works perfectly, paprd frames are
>> not aggregated, so we can look only at the non-aggregated path.
>>
>> lets ignore aggregated path:
>>
>> *ath_tx_form_aggr
>> *ath_tx_send_ampdu
>>
>>
>> non-aggregated path :
>>
>> *ath_tx_start_dma
>> *ath_send_normal
>>
>> -> 'ath_tx_setup_buffer' called from 'ath_tx_start_dma' can have a
>> 'is_paprd' check based on 'txctl->paprd' which holds which chain we are
>> sending PAPRD frame.
>>
>> -> 'ath_send_normal' called from
>> -ath_tx_start_dma ( then 'bf' should be valid and we would not have
>> called 'ath_tx_setup_buffer'
>> -ath_tx_flush_tid ( which is an aggregation path) ignore it.
>>
>>
>> attached rough patch for ath9k, need to be compiled and tested. i will
>> also analyze if this can be done in a better way or any flaws in it
>>
>
> compilation fails with previous patch, forgot to declare the field in
> the declaration, attached patch passes compilation.
>
>
would you like me to test this patch, i can just ran a test parallel y
enabling PAPRD,with this proposed patch.
--
thanks,
shafi
On Thursday 01 March 2012 05:12 PM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
> On Thursday 01 March 2012 11:09 AM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
>> Hi Christian,
>>
>> On Monday 27 February 2012 09:40 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote:
>>> With the new tx status API: "mac80211: implement wifi TX status"
>>> All skb originating from mac80211 needs to be given back to mac80211.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter<[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> It's high time we change all calls in the tx-path from
>>> dev_kfree_skb into ieee80211_free_txskb.
>>>
>>> The call in ath9k_tx is straightforward, but the one in
>>> ath_tx_setup_buffer gives me headaches. I'm not sure if
>>> we even need to check bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd at this
>>> stage since ath_tx_start_dma sets bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd
>>> "after" calling ath_tx_setup_buffer?!
>>
>> yes, i think its a problem, we cannot exactly say its the skb from
>> mac80211 (or) its our PAPRD skb. though with the current code(as the
>> PAPRD) is disabled the skb would be always from mac80211. let us see if
>> we have some good solution.
>
>
> got some idea, need to make sure this works perfectly, paprd frames are
> not aggregated, so we can look only at the non-aggregated path.
>
> lets ignore aggregated path:
>
> *ath_tx_form_aggr
> *ath_tx_send_ampdu
>
>
> non-aggregated path :
>
> *ath_tx_start_dma
> *ath_send_normal
>
> -> 'ath_tx_setup_buffer' called from 'ath_tx_start_dma' can have a
> 'is_paprd' check based on 'txctl->paprd' which holds which chain we are
> sending PAPRD frame.
>
> -> 'ath_send_normal' called from
> -ath_tx_start_dma ( then 'bf' should be valid and we would not have
> called 'ath_tx_setup_buffer'
> -ath_tx_flush_tid ( which is an aggregation path) ignore it.
>
>
> attached rough patch for ath9k, need to be compiled and tested. i will
> also analyze if this can be done in a better way or any flaws in it
>
compilation fails with previous patch, forgot to declare the field in
the declaration, attached patch passes compilation.
--
thanks,
shafi
Hi Christian,
ping
On Thursday 01 March 2012 07:16 PM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
> On Thursday 01 March 2012 05:12 PM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
>> On Thursday 01 March 2012 11:09 AM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
>>> Hi Christian,
>>>
>>> On Monday 27 February 2012 09:40 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote:
>>>> With the new tx status API: "mac80211: implement wifi TX status"
>>>> All skb originating from mac80211 needs to be given back to mac80211.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter<[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> It's high time we change all calls in the tx-path from
>>>> dev_kfree_skb into ieee80211_free_txskb.
>>>>
>>>> The call in ath9k_tx is straightforward, but the one in
>>>> ath_tx_setup_buffer gives me headaches. I'm not sure if
>>>> we even need to check bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd at this
>>>> stage since ath_tx_start_dma sets bf->bf_state.bfs_paprd
>>>> "after" calling ath_tx_setup_buffer?!
>>>
>>> yes, i think its a problem, we cannot exactly say its the skb from
>>> mac80211 (or) its our PAPRD skb. though with the current code(as the
>>> PAPRD) is disabled the skb would be always from mac80211. let us see if
>>> we have some good solution.
>>
>>
>> got some idea, need to make sure this works perfectly, paprd frames are
>> not aggregated, so we can look only at the non-aggregated path.
>>
>> lets ignore aggregated path:
>>
>> *ath_tx_form_aggr
>> *ath_tx_send_ampdu
>>
>>
>> non-aggregated path :
>>
>> *ath_tx_start_dma
>> *ath_send_normal
>>
>> -> 'ath_tx_setup_buffer' called from 'ath_tx_start_dma' can have a
>> 'is_paprd' check based on 'txctl->paprd' which holds which chain we are
>> sending PAPRD frame.
>>
>> -> 'ath_send_normal' called from
>> -ath_tx_start_dma ( then 'bf' should be valid and we would not have
>> called 'ath_tx_setup_buffer'
>> -ath_tx_flush_tid ( which is an aggregation path) ignore it.
>>
>>
>> attached rough patch for ath9k, need to be compiled and tested. i will
>> also analyze if this can be done in a better way or any flaws in it
>>
>
> compilation fails with previous patch, forgot to declare the field in
> the declaration, attached patch passes compilation.
>
>
would you like me to test this patch, i can just ran a bidirectional
traffic test parallel y enabling PAPRD,with this proposed patch.
--
thanks,
shafi