Return-path: Received: from mail2.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.173]:35101 "EHLO mail2.candelatech.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752469AbcFCQgQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jun 2016 12:36:16 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ath10k: remove 10.1 firmware support To: Rajkumar Manoharan References: <20160603153328.11947-1-rmanohar@qti.qualcomm.com> <20160603153328.11947-2-rmanohar@qti.qualcomm.com> <5751A6D5.7080901@candelatech.com> <743182bcbd1efbdb576bcc51b0215300@codeaurora.org> <5751AB3F.2070604@candelatech.com> <0ec837e1ff03d8a7df8bc06ebca7c635@codeaurora.org> Cc: Rajkumar Manoharan , ath10k@lists.infradead.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org From: Ben Greear Message-ID: <5751B1FF.2070307@candelatech.com> (sfid-20160603_183619_816464_1EA8BD51) Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 09:36:15 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0ec837e1ff03d8a7df8bc06ebca7c635@codeaurora.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 06/03/2016 09:28 AM, Rajkumar Manoharan wrote: > On 2016-06-03 21:37, Ben Greear wrote: >> On 06/03/2016 08:55 AM, Rajkumar Manoharan wrote: >>> On 2016-06-03 21:18, Ben Greear wrote: >>>> On 06/03/2016 08:33 AM, Rajkumar Manoharan wrote: >>>>> Earlier qca9888 device was brought up using 10.1 firmware and then >>>>> later all firmware fixes and new features are migrated to 10.2/10.2.x >>>>> firmware branch. As all of 10.1 funtionalities are supported in 10.2 >>>>> based firmware, removing 10.1 firmware support for qca9888 device. >>>> >>>> Oh please do not do this. My 10.1 firmware works very nicely, >>>> and out-performs 10.2 in my testing. Lots of people use my firmware >>>> when they need IBSS support or other features not found in >>>> official firmware, so it is not just me that will have >>>> problems if you remove this support. >>>> >>> Aah.. I thought CT firmware is 10.2 based. Since most of firmware bug fixes and enhancements are integrated into 10.2 based firmware, we thought of get rid of >>> 10.1 firmware to reduce code size. Moreover existing 10.1 official firmware has known issues. Is it possible to upgrade CT firmware to 10.2 WMI/HTT interfaces? >> >> I have a 10.2 firmware too, but it is less stable, performs worse, >> uses more RAM on the NIC (so I can do fewer virtual stations), >> and I am not sure I can squeeze enough RAM out of it to port some >> of the more interesting rate-ctrl fixes from 10.1 to 10.2. >> I have recently started backporting a lot of 10.2.4 changes >> into 10.1, which will aid any users on pre 4.0 kernels since they cannot >> run 10.2.4 firmware w/out backporting. >> >> I might could make my 10.1 work with a 10.2 driver API, but it would >> take quite a bit of >> effort, way more than what removing 10.1 from the driver saves in my opinion. >> The driver already separates firmware specific logic pretty well, so I >> don't think >> it should be a huge maintenance effort to keep 10.1 support in the driver. >> >> Maybe you could delete the 10.2 (not 10.2.4) firmware support and gain >> some space that way? I >> doubt anyone is using that productively.... >> > Nope. There are customers who are still using 10.2.2 firmware. My kind advice is that please try to optimize latest firmware. 10.2 is nothing but based on 10.1 > trunk so there wont be much interface difference... Will drop this series as of now... 10.2 has a significant re-work of the rate-ctrl. I think that is the main difference that I see. Maybe I can just copy the 10.1 rate-ctrl over 10.2 and get back the memory and performance that I need. But, I have a bunch of other stuff to do first. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com