Hi James,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 12:50 PM
> To: Avinash Patil
> Cc: [email protected]; Amitkumar Karwar; Cathy Luo; Zhaoyang Liu;
> Chin-Ran Lo; Plus Chen; Shengzhen Li; Nishant Sarmukadam
> Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 9/9] mwifiex: delay skb allocation for RX until cmd53
> over
> 
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 05:37:59PM +0530, Avinash Patil wrote:
> > From: Zhaoyang Liu <[email protected]>
> >
> > This patch moves SKB allocation for RX packets from current place i.e.
> > after reading MP regs to place where we already have read data from
> > SDIO bus ie after cmd53.
> >
> > mp_rx_aggr_setup has been modified accordingly to set skb_arr to NULL.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Zhaoyang Liu <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Shengzhen Li <[email protected]>
> > Reviewed-by: Amitkumar Karwar <[email protected]>
> > Reviewed-by: Cathy Luo <[email protected]>
> > Reviewed-by: Avinash Patil <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/wireless/mwifiex/sdio.c | 59
> > ++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> >  drivers/net/wireless/mwifiex/sdio.h |  8 ++---
> >  2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/mwifiex/sdio.c
> > b/drivers/net/wireless/mwifiex/sdio.c
> > index fdeeb67..330e9d0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/mwifiex/sdio.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/mwifiex/sdio.c
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > @@ -1538,24 +1550,11 @@ static int mwifiex_process_int_status(struct
> mwifiex_adapter *adapter)
> >                                     rx_len);
> >                             return -1;
> >                     }
> > -                   rx_len = (u16) (rx_blocks * MWIFIEX_SDIO_BLOCK_SIZE);
> >
> > -                   skb = mwifiex_alloc_dma_align_buf(rx_len,
> > -                                                     GFP_KERNEL |
> > -                                                     GFP_DMA);
> > -
> > -                   if (!skb) {
> > -                           dev_err(adapter->dev, "%s: failed to alloc skb",
> > -                                   __func__);
> > -                           return -1;
> > -                   }
> 
> I like it.
> 
> Because I continue to have problems with dev_alloc_skb failing, and the
> "return -1;" that you are removing doesn't seem to leave the card and driver
> in a useful state.
> 
> Your patch is hopefully an improvement.
> 
> Have you done any testing of response after skb allocation failure before and
> after your patch?

Yes; we have tested skb allocation failures but only for stability purposes. 
Unfortunately data path would still remain stuck after such allocation 
failures. We are working on a fix to ensure data patch also recovers in this 
case and soon submit a patch.
> --
> James Cameron
> http://quozl.linux.org.au/

-Avinash
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to