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 sta? I thought normal mcast data frames only use non-QoS >> frames. And yes, I'm currently mixing normal and txq-TX to prioritize >> ctl/mgmt frames over other less important traffic. > > Management (and maybe control) frames can have different priorities as > well, this is only used for something with TDLS now I think though. With my implementation, those would go through the normal tx codepath, bypassing the software tx queues. Can you think of anything else that would need per-AC vif queues? - Felix -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
