On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 8:39 PM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > Yeah, but why bother if we can just allocate 10% of the size, waste a >> > lot less memory etc. mac80211 isn't going to pass in a scatter/gather >> > frame anyway. >> >> Hope never dies. I actually have seen this speed up the throughput so >> I will dig into it anyway. > > Well, you can always add it back later if you make the networking stack > and mac80211 support it. It's a two-line patch after all. I will handle this. >> > The more interesting thing is the pci_alloc_consistent allocation right >> > below that is also _huge_, but that's because of the stupid hardware >> > design, or can the hardware cope with having the descriptors non-linear >> > in memory? >> >> We talk after your next HW design. How will configure 265 * 16 >> descriptors separately. > > Well, considering that other hardware does manage to do things > differently (say Broadcom because I know their DMA engine), I don't know > why your hw designers went wild with this. All you need is an > "end-of-frame" flag. But that's not really interesting to discuss, > unless this is actually controlled by the microcode and you can change > it. > This is have to do something with HW packet scheduling > johannes > -- 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
