Received: by 2002:a25:8b12:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id i18csp623006ybl; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 01:08:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw89cnNFCDxfEyP2PcReH/QnagJoELOJQAcwuIN1v9Nif0w9DUlQERu8mGcE3PnUVrn/+I/ X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:71c3:: with SMTP id m3mr5707617pjs.53.1565942882846; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 01:08:02 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1565942882; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=ddiaBFopoFYDxgqhLuUNZykLdI20NOmrZrOnJpLzyEldT7OPXIyjn8aX88e0RQVxQj e0hLPeiOhXLAiOQlzkwsumYZv++mRmwi30iZ9hpM8Gbn7kJLnSkLtzcLYFsqDWQbZHbK 8Ch9siyJ/rjgKo8BLpAapwViFU0MTGGJkvrwkQoulhoYrfGiaFNxd+TL7xmMh423BW0q cv3ElWPi/4ej2i32LoIsHniqjOwrcCkNj1hl9w5b7DbVu0LtRqShMC4U0XPmj2aH9dFf 9Ry2RlzIkD6/o+vBSYDGSbcwSpumxaZb2lM0VuY3MCblou/brMJX9+WVXD2S9PPYrLdI e4tA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:accept-language:in-reply-to:references:message-id :date:thread-index:thread-topic:subject:cc:to:from:authenticated-by; bh=R+XfW4sSBsIzttEbyEto5rqdZHdm8kXYrg6Ci+FLxdc=; b=zMIdJcbGDe/IuiiLjmRkVFo6NmqGU8F3k5ZK5etsIY8pgyMLuU8egVexoaCFlh+yDk +Qc+BcoupkL5r1j03hcDTTrQmFWP8jmCI7QQqnHekIObWVnsyqhfTvpKN6L8Fm/uv3zW bjqG8+Lho3Kj4PsczMH8SMh7VDfrNsWjz9PjvXt8l4LFE4TSDvnfNpf9X+BRdJ+RttRs te1BqPrF3xQV6nPTqVjNOEDnK5L+w6yhOmPspbmNJ5a07JWct6DevkCE834qJgvu+/nX sMb84/7FjFJrZLzxb60hQtZ5FRnB6rA3FBr6d9TQf2klWgxgFI/NipHQAtt1/2ihPmOF zJNQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 91si3631648pld.380.2019.08.16.01.07.44; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 01:08:02 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726903AbfHPIHL convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 16 Aug 2019 04:07:11 -0400 Received: from rtits2.realtek.com ([211.75.126.72]:40868 "EHLO rtits2.realtek.com.tw" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726819AbfHPIHL (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Aug 2019 04:07:11 -0400 Authenticated-By: X-SpamFilter-By: BOX Solutions SpamTrap 5.62 with qID x7G870ea019280, This message is accepted by code: ctloc85258 Received: from mail.realtek.com (RTITCAS11.realtek.com.tw [172.21.6.12]) by rtits2.realtek.com.tw (8.15.2/2.57/5.78) with ESMTP id x7G870ea019280; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 16:07:00 +0800 Received: from RTITMBSVM04.realtek.com.tw ([fe80::e404:880:2ef1:1aa1]) by RTITCAS11.realtek.com.tw ([fe80::7c6d:ced5:c4ff:8297%15]) with mapi id 14.03.0468.000; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 16:07:00 +0800 From: Tony Chuang To: Tony Chuang , Jian-Hong Pan , Kalle Valo , "David S . Miller" CC: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux@endlessm.com" Subject: RE: [PATCH] rtw88: pci: Move a mass of jobs in hw IRQ to soft IRQ Thread-Topic: [PATCH] rtw88: pci: Move a mass of jobs in hw IRQ to soft IRQ Thread-Index: AQHVU/x2Dr02g4Mib0ipy5Mk0nEf5ab9ZdpggAAEAFA= Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 08:06:59 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20190816063109.4699-1-jian-hong@endlessm.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: zh-TW, en-US Content-Language: zh-TW X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.21.68.183] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Hi, A few more questions below > > From: Jian-Hong Pan [mailto:jian-hong@endlessm.com] > > > > There is a mass of jobs between spin lock and unlock in the hardware > > IRQ which will occupy much time originally. To make system work more > > efficiently, this patch moves the jobs to the soft IRQ (bottom half) to > > reduce the time in hardware IRQ. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jian-Hong Pan > > --- > > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++----- > > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c > > b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c > > index 00ef229552d5..355606b167c6 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c > > @@ -866,12 +866,29 @@ static irqreturn_t rtw_pci_interrupt_handler(int > irq, > > void *dev) > > { > > struct rtw_dev *rtwdev = dev; > > struct rtw_pci *rtwpci = (struct rtw_pci *)rtwdev->priv; > > - u32 irq_status[4]; > > + unsigned long flags; > > > > - spin_lock(&rtwpci->irq_lock); > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&rtwpci->irq_lock, flags); I think you can use 'spin_lock()' here as it's in IRQ context? > > if (!rtwpci->irq_enabled) > > goto out; > > > > + /* disable RTW PCI interrupt to avoid more interrupts before the end of > > + * thread function > > + */ > > + rtw_pci_disable_interrupt(rtwdev, rtwpci); Why do we need rtw_pci_disable_interrupt() here. Have you done any experiment and decided to add this. If you have can you share your results to me? > > +out: > > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rtwpci->irq_lock, flags); spin_unlock() > > + > > + return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD; > > +} > > + > > +static irqreturn_t rtw_pci_interrupt_threadfn(int irq, void *dev) > > +{ > > + struct rtw_dev *rtwdev = dev; > > + struct rtw_pci *rtwpci = (struct rtw_pci *)rtwdev->priv; > > + unsigned long flags; > > + u32 irq_status[4]; > > + > > rtw_pci_irq_recognized(rtwdev, rtwpci, irq_status); > > > > if (irq_status[0] & IMR_MGNTDOK) > > @@ -891,8 +908,11 @@ static irqreturn_t rtw_pci_interrupt_handler(int > irq, > > void *dev) > > if (irq_status[0] & IMR_ROK) > > rtw_pci_rx_isr(rtwdev, rtwpci, RTW_RX_QUEUE_MPDU); > > > > -out: > > - spin_unlock(&rtwpci->irq_lock); > > + /* all of the jobs for this interrupt have been done */ > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&rtwpci->irq_lock, flags); > > Shouldn't we protect the ISRs above? > > This patch could actually reduce the time of IRQ. > But I think I need to further test it with PCI MSI interrupt. > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11081539/ > > Maybe we could drop the "rtw_pci_[enable/disable]_interrupt" when MSI > Is enabled with this patch. > > > + if (rtw_flag_check(rtwdev, RTW_FLAG_RUNNING)) > > + rtw_pci_enable_interrupt(rtwdev, rtwpci); > > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rtwpci->irq_lock, flags); > > > > return IRQ_HANDLED; > > } > > @@ -1152,8 +1172,10 @@ static int rtw_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, > > goto err_destroy_pci; > > } > > > > - ret = request_irq(pdev->irq, &rtw_pci_interrupt_handler, > > - IRQF_SHARED, KBUILD_MODNAME, rtwdev); > > + ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(rtwdev->dev, pdev->irq, > > + rtw_pci_interrupt_handler, > > + rtw_pci_interrupt_threadfn, > > + IRQF_SHARED, KBUILD_MODNAME, rtwdev); > > if (ret) { > > ieee80211_unregister_hw(hw); > > goto err_destroy_pci; > > @@ -1192,7 +1214,7 @@ static void rtw_pci_remove(struct pci_dev > *pdev) > > rtw_pci_disable_interrupt(rtwdev, rtwpci); > > rtw_pci_destroy(rtwdev, pdev); > > rtw_pci_declaim(rtwdev, pdev); > > - free_irq(rtwpci->pdev->irq, rtwdev); > > + devm_free_irq(rtwdev->dev, rtwpci->pdev->irq, rtwdev); > > rtw_core_deinit(rtwdev); > > ieee80211_free_hw(hw); > > } > > -- > > 2.20.1 > > Yan-Hsuan > Thanks Yan-Hsuan