Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless+bounces-6918-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Message-ID: <050ae0d4-c879-40c2-b2ac-1766aaa2c789@quicinc.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:41:33 +0800
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] wifi: ath12k: report station mode transmit rate
To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>
CC: <ath12k@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20240419032122.7009-1-quic_lingbok@quicinc.com>
 <20240419032122.7009-2-quic_lingbok@quicinc.com> <87bk5xs7qj.fsf@kernel.org>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Lingbo Kong <quic_lingbok@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <87bk5xs7qj.fsf@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


On 2024/4/26 0:54, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Lingbo Kong <quic_lingbok@quicinc.com> writes:
> 
>> Currently, the transmit rate of "iw dev xxx station dump" command
>> always show an invalid value.
>>
>> To address this issue, ath12k parse the info of transmit complete
>> report from firmware and indicate the transmit rate to mac80211.
>>
>> This patch affects the station mode of WCN7850 and QCN9274.
>>
>> After that, "iw dev xxx station dump" show the correct transmit rate.
>> Such as:
>>
>> Station 00:03:7f:12:03:03 (on wlo1)
>>          inactive time:  872 ms
>>          rx bytes:       219111
>>          rx packets:     1133
>>          tx bytes:       53767
>>          tx packets:     462
>>          tx retries:     51
>>          tx failed:      0
>>          beacon loss:    0
>>          beacon rx:      403
>>          rx drop misc:   74
>>          signal:         -95 dBm
>>          beacon signal avg:      -18 dBm
>>          tx bitrate:     1441.1 MBit/s 80MHz EHT-MCS 13 EHT-NSS 2 EHT-GI 0
>>
>> Tested-on: WCN7850 hw2.0 PCI WLAN.HMT.1.0.c5-00481-QCAHMTSWPL_V1.0_V2.0_SILICONZ-3
>> Tested-on: QCN9274 hw2.0 PCI WLAN.WBE.1.2.1-00201-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lingbo Kong <quic_lingbok@quicinc.com>
> 
> I'm still going throught the patchset, please don't send a new version
> yet. Few quick comments:
> 
>> +static void ath12k_dp_tx_update_txcompl(struct ath12k *ar, struct hal_tx_status *ts)
>> +{
>> +	struct ath12k_base *ab = ar->ab;
>> +	struct ath12k_peer *peer;
>> +	struct ath12k_sta *arsta;
>> +	struct ieee80211_sta *sta;
>> +	u16 rate;
>> +	u8 rate_idx = 0;
>> +	int ret;
>> +
>> +	spin_lock_bh(&ab->base_lock);
> 
> Did you analyse how this function, and especially taking the base_lock,
> affects performance?
> 

The base_lock is used here because of the need to look for peers based 
on the ts->peer_id when calling ath12k_peer_find_by_id() function, which 
i think might affect performance.

Do i need to run a throughput test?

>> +enum nl80211_he_ru_alloc ath12k_mac_he_ru_tones_to_nl80211_he_ru_alloc(u16 ru_tones)
>> +{
>> +	enum nl80211_he_ru_alloc ret;
>> +
>> +	switch (ru_tones) {
>> +	case 26:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_26;
>> +		break;
>> +	case 52:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_52;
>> +		break;
>> +	case 106:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_106;
>> +		break;
>> +	case 242:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_242;
>> +		break;
>> +	case 484:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_484;
>> +		break;
>> +	case 996:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_996;
>> +		break;
>> +	case (996 * 2):
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_2x996;
>> +		break;
>> +	default:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_26;
>> +		break;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	return ret;
>> +}
> 
> How does this function compare to ath12k_he_ru_tones_to_nl80211_he_ru_alloc()?
> 

ath12k_mac_he_ru_tones_to_nl80211_he_ru_alloc() is different from 
ath12k_he_ru_tones_to_nl80211_he_ru_alloc().

the logic of ath12k_he_ru_tones_to_nl80211_he_ru_alloc() is

static inline
enum nl80211_he_ru_alloc ath12k_he_ru_tones_to_nl80211_he_ru_alloc(u16 
ru_tones)
{
         enum nl80211_he_ru_alloc ret;

         switch (ru_tones) {
         case RU_52:
                 ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_52;
                 break;
         case RU_106:
                 ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_106;
                 break;
         case RU_242:
                 ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_242;
                 break;
         case RU_484:
                 ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_484;
                 break;
         case RU_996:
                 ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_996;
                 break;
         case RU_26:
                 fallthrough;
         default:
                 ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_HE_RU_ALLOC_26;
                 break;
         }
         return ret;
}

#define RU_26  1
#define RU_52  2
#define RU_106 4
#define RU_242 9
#define RU_484 18
#define RU_996 37


>> +enum nl80211_eht_gi ath12k_mac_eht_gi_to_nl80211_eht_gi(u8 sgi)
>> +{
>> +	enum nl80211_eht_gi ret;
>> +
>> +	switch (sgi) {
>> +	case RX_MSDU_START_SGI_0_8_US:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_GI_0_8;
>> +		break;
>> +	case RX_MSDU_START_SGI_1_6_US:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_GI_1_6;
>> +		break;
>> +	case RX_MSDU_START_SGI_3_2_US:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_GI_3_2;
>> +		break;
>> +	default:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_GI_0_8;
>> +		break;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	return ret;
>> +}
> 
> BTW the ret variable is unnessary, this could be simplified to:
> 
> switch (foo) {
> case FOO1:
>          return BAR1;
> case FOO2:
>          return BAR2;
> default:
>          return BAR3;
> }
> 
>> +enum nl80211_eht_ru_alloc ath12k_mac_eht_ru_tones_to_nl80211_eht_ru_alloc(u16 ru_tones)
>> +{
>> +	enum nl80211_eht_ru_alloc ret;
>> +
>> +	switch (ru_tones) {
>> +	case 26:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_26;
>> +		break;
>> +	case 52:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_52;
>> +		break;
>> +	case (52 + 26):
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_52P26;
>> +		break;
>> +	case 106:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_106;
>> +		break;
>> +	case (106 + 26):
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_106P26;
>> +		break;
>> +	case 242:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_242;
>> +		break;
>> +	case 484:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_484;
>> +		break;
>> +	case (484 + 242):
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_484P242;
>> +		break;
>> +	case 996:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_996;
>> +		break;
>> +	case (996 + 484):
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_996P484;
>> +		break;
>> +	case (996 + 484 + 242):
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_996P484P242;
>> +		break;
>> +	case (2 * 996):
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_2x996;
>> +		break;
>> +	case (2 * 996 + 484):
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_2x996P484;
>> +		break;
>> +	case (3 * 996):
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_3x996;
>> +		break;
>> +	case (3 * 996 + 484):
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_3x996P484;
>> +		break;
>> +	case (4 * 996):
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_4x996;
>> +		break;
>> +	default:
>> +		ret = NL80211_RATE_INFO_EHT_RU_ALLOC_26;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	return ret;
>> +}
> 
> Same here.
>