> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, November 7, 2022 8:33 PM
> To: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: rtw89: 8852b: change debug mask of message of no TX resource
>
> Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > 8852B has smaller TX FIFO than others in WiFi chip, so it would be buffer
> > full frequently, but it doesn't affect TX performance. However, it shows
> > verbose debug messages with RTW89_DBG_UNEXP mask that is to show up
> > abnormal behavior, so change debug mask to RTW89_DBG_TXRX for 8852B.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/pci.c | 12 ++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/pci.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/pci.c
> > index 07a2e23759f0b..99a254d7ba5ed 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/pci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/pci.c
> > @@ -971,8 +971,10 @@ static u32 __rtw89_pci_check_and_reclaim_tx_resource(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev,
> > struct rtw89_pci *rtwpci = (struct rtw89_pci *)rtwdev->priv;
> > struct rtw89_pci_tx_ring *tx_ring = &rtwpci->tx_rings[txch];
> > struct rtw89_pci_tx_wd_ring *wd_ring = &tx_ring->wd_ring;
> > + const struct rtw89_chip_info *chip = rtwdev->chip;
> > u32 bd_cnt, wd_cnt, min_cnt = 0;
> > struct rtw89_pci_rx_ring *rx_ring;
> > + enum rtw89_debug_mask debug_mask;
> > u32 cnt;
> >
> > rx_ring = &rtwpci->rx_rings[RTW89_RXCH_RPQ];
> > @@ -996,10 +998,16 @@ static u32 __rtw89_pci_check_and_reclaim_tx_resource(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev,
> > bd_cnt = rtw89_pci_get_avail_txbd_num(tx_ring);
> > wd_cnt = wd_ring->curr_num;
> > min_cnt = min(bd_cnt, wd_cnt);
> > - if (min_cnt == 0)
> > - rtw89_debug(rtwdev, rtwpci->low_power ? RTW89_DBG_TXRX : RTW89_DBG_UNEXP,
> > + if (min_cnt == 0) {
> > + if (rtwpci->low_power || chip->chip_id == RTL8852B)
> > + debug_mask = RTW89_DBG_TXRX;
> > + else
> > + debug_mask = RTW89_DBG_UNEXP;
> > +
> > + rtw89_debug(rtwdev, debug_mask,
> > "still no tx resource after reclaim: wd_cnt=%d bd_cnt=%d\n",
> > wd_cnt, bd_cnt);
> > + }
>
> Changing the debug mask like this looks a bit weird to me. At least it
> would be good to have a comment in the code explainin why this is done
> like this.
>
I will add a comment to figure out the reason.
Ping-Ke
