Hi, A few more questions below > > From: Jian-Hong Pan [mailto:jian-hong@xxxxxxxxxxxx] > > > > There is a mass of jobs between spin lock and unlock in the hardware > > IRQ which will occupy much time originally. To make system work more > > efficiently, this patch moves the jobs to the soft IRQ (bottom half) to > > reduce the time in hardware IRQ. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jian-Hong Pan <jian-hong@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++----- > > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c > > b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c > > index 00ef229552d5..355606b167c6 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/pci.c > > @@ -866,12 +866,29 @@ static irqreturn_t rtw_pci_interrupt_handler(int > irq, > > void *dev) > > { > > struct rtw_dev *rtwdev = dev; > > struct rtw_pci *rtwpci = (struct rtw_pci *)rtwdev->priv; > > - u32 irq_status[4]; > > + unsigned long flags; > > > > - spin_lock(&rtwpci->irq_lock); > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&rtwpci->irq_lock, flags); I think you can use 'spin_lock()' here as it's in IRQ context? > > if (!rtwpci->irq_enabled) > > goto out; > > > > + /* disable RTW PCI interrupt to avoid more interrupts before the end of > > + * thread function > > + */ > > + rtw_pci_disable_interrupt(rtwdev, rtwpci); Why do we need rtw_pci_disable_interrupt() here. Have you done any experiment and decided to add this. If you have can you share your results to me? > > +out: > > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rtwpci->irq_lock, flags); spin_unlock() > > + > > + return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD; > > +} > > + > > +static irqreturn_t rtw_pci_interrupt_threadfn(int irq, void *dev) > > +{ > > + struct rtw_dev *rtwdev = dev; > > + struct rtw_pci *rtwpci = (struct rtw_pci *)rtwdev->priv; > > + unsigned long flags; > > + u32 irq_status[4]; > > + > > rtw_pci_irq_recognized(rtwdev, rtwpci, irq_status); > > > > if (irq_status[0] & IMR_MGNTDOK) > > @@ -891,8 +908,11 @@ static irqreturn_t rtw_pci_interrupt_handler(int > irq, > > void *dev) > > if (irq_status[0] & IMR_ROK) > > rtw_pci_rx_isr(rtwdev, rtwpci, RTW_RX_QUEUE_MPDU); > > > > -out: > > - spin_unlock(&rtwpci->irq_lock); > > + /* all of the jobs for this interrupt have been done */ > > + spin_lock_irqsave(&rtwpci->irq_lock, flags); > > Shouldn't we protect the ISRs above? > > This patch could actually reduce the time of IRQ. > But I think I need to further test it with PCI MSI interrupt. > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11081539/ > > Maybe we could drop the "rtw_pci_[enable/disable]_interrupt" when MSI > Is enabled with this patch. > > > + if (rtw_flag_check(rtwdev, RTW_FLAG_RUNNING)) > > + rtw_pci_enable_interrupt(rtwdev, rtwpci); > > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rtwpci->irq_lock, flags); > > > > return IRQ_HANDLED; > > } > > @@ -1152,8 +1172,10 @@ static int rtw_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, > > goto err_destroy_pci; > > } > > > > - ret = request_irq(pdev->irq, &rtw_pci_interrupt_handler, > > - IRQF_SHARED, KBUILD_MODNAME, rtwdev); > > + ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(rtwdev->dev, pdev->irq, > > + rtw_pci_interrupt_handler, > > + rtw_pci_interrupt_threadfn, > > + IRQF_SHARED, KBUILD_MODNAME, rtwdev); > > if (ret) { > > ieee80211_unregister_hw(hw); > > goto err_destroy_pci; > > @@ -1192,7 +1214,7 @@ static void rtw_pci_remove(struct pci_dev > *pdev) > > rtw_pci_disable_interrupt(rtwdev, rtwpci); > > rtw_pci_destroy(rtwdev, pdev); > > rtw_pci_declaim(rtwdev, pdev); > > - free_irq(rtwpci->pdev->irq, rtwdev); > > + devm_free_irq(rtwdev->dev, rtwpci->pdev->irq, rtwdev); > > rtw_core_deinit(rtwdev); > > ieee80211_free_hw(hw); > > } > > -- > > 2.20.1 > > Yan-Hsuan > Thanks Yan-Hsuan
