> > > > Possibly the same symptoms don't exist on 128MB RAM devices. > > Like there is some if condition, which is doing some nasty things on 64M > devices? I admit, that I don't have ath10k-ct source code under my pillow, but > it doesn't make much sense to me. > > > Comparable results between above and my 64MB device. However, if the > > sleep time is extended the consumption is more > > Ok, I'll let it run overnight with 120s sleep in between. > > > I suspect this is not the intended behavior. > > No its not and it's even strange, that I'm not seeing it here if it should > happen in the "default setup". Maybe its because: > > 1. You're using custom image (I'm using official prebuilt images) > 2. You're not providing all the steps needed to reproduce the issue > 3. I've way different hardware > > Every detail could make huge difference. > > -- ynezz
On the device I am testing, it is both (2GHz) ath9k and (5GHz) ath10k. These look to be related patches to this issue: 960-0010-ath10k-limit-htt-rx-ring-size.patch 960-0011-ath10k-limit-pci-buffer-size.patch In the v19.07.0-rc2 build for the rb-nor-flash-16M-ac ar71xx image, these patches are applied to backports-4.19.85-1, but don't seem to be applied to ath10k-ct-2019-09-09-5e8cd86f. Should ath10k-ct have these and other patches? The device's installed packages do include ath10k-ct (from downloads.openwrt.org installed image). Joe AE6XE _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel