Hi James, > -----Original Message----- > From: quozl@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:quozl@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 12:50 PM > To: Avinash Patil > Cc: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; 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 <liuzy@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > 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 <liuzy@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Shengzhen Li <szli@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Amitkumar Karwar <akarwar@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Cathy Luo <cluo@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Avinash Patil <patila@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > 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 majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
