On 04/02/2013 09:56 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: Alan Ott <a...@signal11.us> > Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 21:24:59 -0400 > >> I like it for a couple of reasons. >> 1. Most supported devices have only single packet output buffer, so >> blocking in the driver is the most straight-forward way to handle it. >> The alternative is to make each driver have a workqueue for xmit() (to >> lift the blocking out from atomic context). This makes each driver simpler. >> >> 2. All of the flow control can be handled one time in the mac802154 layer. > We have a perfectly working flow control mechanism in the generic > networking queuing layer. Please use it instead of inventing things.
I'm pretty sure that's what I'm doing in [1]. When I say "flow control can be handled," I mean managing calls to netif_stop_queue() and netif_wake_queue(). Is there something else I should be doing instead? > If it does not meet your needs, fix it, rather than go off and do > your own thing. That way everyone benfits, not just you. Fully agreed. Alan. [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg231483.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Minimize network downtime and maximize team effectiveness. Reduce network management and security costs.Learn how to hire the most talented Cisco Certified professionals. Visit the Employer Resources Portal http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/employer_resources/index.html _______________________________________________ Linux-zigbee-devel mailing list Linux-zigbee-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-zigbee-devel
