On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 12:14 AM, Felix Fietkau n...@openwrt.org wrote:
+static void ieee80211_drv_tx(struct ieee80211_local *local,
+struct ieee80211_vif *vif,
+struct ieee80211_sta *pubsta,
+struct sk_buff
On 2014-12-16 00:25, Bartosz Szczepanek wrote:
As for drv_wake_tx_queue and ieee80211_tx_dequeue - is it really
necessary? There are ieee80211_tx_status and ieee80211_free_txskb
already, which can be used to decide from mac80211 level when to
dequeue packet. It could be used even in case of
As for drv_wake_tx_queue and ieee80211_tx_dequeue - is it really
necessary? There are ieee80211_tx_status and ieee80211_free_txskb
already, which can be used to decide from mac80211 level when to
dequeue packet. It could be used even in case of drivers that are not
aware of new mechanism at all.
On Wed, 2014-11-19 at 00:14 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote:
+ struct txq_info *txq;
+ atomic_t txq_len[IEEE80211_NUM_ACS];
I think you should consider renaming the latter to txqs_len or so - it
doesn't just cover one txq as is be implied by the name now. Otherwise
the skb_queue_head also
On 2014-12-12 14:21, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Wed, 2014-11-19 at 00:14 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote:
+struct txq_info *txq;
+atomic_t txq_len[IEEE80211_NUM_ACS];
I think you should consider renaming the latter to txqs_len or so - it
doesn't just cover one txq as is be implied by the
On 2014-12-12 15:01, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2014-12-12 at 14:40 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote:
Then
again what even sets vif-txq? Shouldn't those be per-AC? Do you really
want to mix 'normal' and txq-TX?
Are we even using multiple ACs for packets that don't belong to a
particular
