Adrian Chadd <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 23 April 2018 at 08:50, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>
>> Adrian was also commenting something similar about adding a debugfs
>> interface but I don't really see the point right now while we are adding
>> initial wcn3990 support. If someone wants to run measurements with and
>> without this parameter it's very easy to edit it out from the sources.
>> Later on we can consider making it dynamic if there's really the need
>> for that, but I'm very skeptic that anyone would even need that.
>
> Hi!
>
> We have at ${WORK}, because we've found various devices (atheros and
> qualcomm and QCA and otherwise) have this nasty habit of trying to
> guess when a good time to clock-gate down is, but we're busy doing low
> latency audio/video.
>
> 10, 20ms may not be a lot of latency for bulk data but that's a half
> to one of a video frame in my world. :-)
Sure, I get that. But we should discuss making a setting like this
dynamic once we have a test case and numbers showing that it's needed,
otherwise it's just unnecessary cruft.
--
Kalle Valo
