Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f180.google.com ([209.85.212.180]:63816 "EHLO mail-wi0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750826AbaIXGuk convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Sep 2014 02:50:40 -0400 Received: by mail-wi0-f180.google.com with SMTP id q5so6558087wiv.7 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 23:50:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5421818A.9040501@candelatech.com> References: <1411151304-31544-1-git-send-email-greearb@candelatech.com> <5421818A.9040501@candelatech.com> Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 08:50:38 +0200 Message-ID: (sfid-20140924_085044_521514_1A8A0A1C) Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: request firmware flush in ath10k_flush. From: Michal Kazior To: Ben Greear Cc: linux-wireless , "ath10k@lists.infradead.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 23 September 2014 16:19, Ben Greear wrote: > On 09/23/2014 02:16 AM, Michal Kazior wrote: >> On 19 September 2014 20:28, wrote: >> [...] >>> >>> + /* If we are CT firmware, ask it to flush all tids on all peers >>> on >>> + * all vdevs. Normal firmware will just crash if you do this. >>> + */ >>> + if (test_bit(ATH10K_FW_FEATURE_WMI_10X_CT, ar->fw_features)) >>> + ath10k_wmi_peer_flush(ar, 0xFFFFFFFF, peer_addr, >>> 0xFFFFFFFF); >> >> I recall you've explained this some time ago, but can you refresh my >> memory, please? Is this any different from iterating over all peers >> and flushing each? Or does your firmware do so extra magic that is >> impossible to do with normal firmware commands? > > My firmware does that iteration internally. > > You could probably do that in the driver, but it would be a lot > of messages (for all vdevs, all peers, all tids)... > I was not sure if there were limits to the number > of commands you should attempt during the flush... Thanks. I think ath10k should do this instead of having CT-specific flush eventually. I recall I actually did per-peer flushing in RFC patches a long time ago but I didn't pursue getting them merged. I think Denton uses these patches in his setup. They don't flush vdev self-peers though (do you do that internally?). Michał