From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Jeff Johnson <jeff.johnson@oss.qualcomm.com>,
david@ixit.cz, Jeff Johnson <jjohnson@kernel.org>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com>,
Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@tieto.com>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath10k@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
phone-devel@vger.kernel.org,
Richard Acayan <mailingradian@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2] wifi: ath10k: make in-order rx amsdu buffers persistent
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 08:33:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <60bba9a844d8fe0a94d19b8e59f52b4b36e9a35a.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0b9f80bf-73e8-4e9d-9726-b8816c9a364b@oss.qualcomm.com>
On Thu, 2026-07-30 at 19:24 -0700, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> On 7/19/2026 2:45 PM, David Heidelberg via B4 Relay wrote:
> > From: Richard Acayan <mailingradian@gmail.com>
> >
> > The WCN3990 might split MSDUs among multiple "in-order" indications. The
> > driver needs information from previous indications to handle MPDUs that
> > are not started by the same indications that complete them. Move the
> > list that tracks unprocessed MSDUs to the driver state so the driver can
> > handle MPDUs that are split in this way and be less confused.
> I'm transcribing a few comments from my review agent (which may overlap
> Sashiko). I have not vetted them for correctness. Hopefully I placed them at
> the correct spots!
I think this is one of those cases where just doing LLMs isn't all that
helpful?
I'm not at all familiar with this, but why does this really need all the
complexity of hanging on to the entire MPDU etc. when "[the] driver
needs information"? Couldn't it just hang on to the relevant information
and reduce the complexity here?
Also, the entire point of this is for the loop, so when the LLM says:
> > + msdu = skb_peek(list);
> > + rxd = HTT_RX_BUF_TO_RX_DESC(hw,
> > + (void *)msdu->data - hw->rx_desc_ops->rx_desc_size);
>
> Dead rxd computation before the loop — VALID, MINOR
I feel like it's probably missing the point entirely - the in-loop
version should be removed?
johannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-31 6:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-19 21:45 David Heidelberg via B4 Relay
2026-07-21 10:39 ` David Heidelberg
2026-07-31 2:24 ` Jeff Johnson
2026-07-31 6:33 ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2026-07-31 14:39 ` Richard Acayan
2026-07-31 14:55 ` David Heidelberg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=60bba9a844d8fe0a94d19b8e59f52b4b36e9a35a.camel@sipsolutions.net \
--to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=david@ixit.cz \
--cc=jeff.johnson@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=jjohnson@kernel.org \
--cc=kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mailingradian@gmail.com \
--cc=michal.kazior@tieto.com \
--cc=phone-devel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®