Hi Stanislaw,
On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 00:31 -0800, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> Usually H/W generate statistics notify once per about 100ms, but
> sometimes we can receive notify in shorter time, even 2 ms.
>
> This can be problem for plcp health and ack health checking.
>
> I.e. with 2 plcp errors happens randomly in 2 ms duration, we
> exceed plcp delta threshold equal to 100 (2*100/2).
>
> Also checking ack's in short time, can results not necessary false
> positive and firmware reset, for example when channel is noised and
> we do not receive ACKs frames or when remote device does not send
> ACKs at the moment.
>
> Patch change code, to do statistic check and possible recovery only
> if 99ms elapsed from last check. Forced delay should assure we have
> good statistic data to estimate hardware state.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-3945.c | 24 ++++++++------
> drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn-rx.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++----------
> drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn.c | 2 +
> drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-agn.h | 2 +-
> drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-core.h | 4 +-
> drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-dev.h | 4 +-
> drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-rx.c | 4 +-
> drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl3945-base.c | 1 +
> 8 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-3945.c b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-3945.c
> index f371d42..9646cbc 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-3945.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-3945.c
> @@ -409,11 +409,9 @@ static void iwl3945_accumulative_statistics(struct iwl_priv *priv,
> * to improve the throughput.
> */
> static bool iwl3945_good_plcp_health(struct iwl_priv *priv,
> - struct iwl_rx_packet *pkt)
> + struct iwl_rx_packet *pkt, unsigned int msecs)
> {
> __le32 cur_plcp_err, old_plcp_err;
> - unsigned int msecs;
> - unsigned long stamp;
> int delta;
> int threshold = priv->cfg->base_params->plcp_delta_threshold;
>
> @@ -422,12 +420,7 @@ static bool iwl3945_good_plcp_health(struct iwl_priv *priv,
> return true;
> }
>
> - stamp = jiffies;
> - msecs = jiffies_to_msecs(stamp - priv->plcp_jiffies);
> - priv->plcp_jiffies = stamp;
> -
> - if (msecs == 0)
> - return true;
> + BUG_ON(msecs == 0);
why not just return? I understand it should not be "0", but really need
BUG_ON?
>
> - stamp = jiffies;
> - msecs = jiffies_to_msecs(stamp - priv->plcp_jiffies);
> - priv->plcp_jiffies = stamp;
> -
> - if (msecs == 0)
> - return true;
> + BUG_ON(msecs == 0);
Same above
Similar question, we are very close to finish driver split, when is the
best time for this patch?
Thanks
Wey
--
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
