From: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>
To: Kim Wooseok <5mghybrid@khu.ac.kr>
Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
"Jes Sorensen" <Jes.Sorensen@gmail.com>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH rtw-next v3 3/3] wifi: rtl8xxxu: preserve RX requests across recoverable transfer errors
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2026 00:24:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8d8e60e260254dc2a2cc1f37cd1b3832@realtek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAH1Bc_yTizX4Cex+GRLeRUtaBdp8jEc2XEyawMzkQsZFpj1QGw@mail.gmail.com>
Kim Wooseok <5mghybrid@khu.ac.kr> wrote:
> > Not prefer using bare system_wq.
> > Can both use schedule_delayed_work()?
>
> In v3, the error path uses queue_delayed_work(system_wq, ..., delay),
> while normal completions use mod_delayed_work(system_wq, ..., 0).
>
> I can replace the error-path call with schedule_delayed_work().
> However, the normal-completion path is intended to bring an existing
> delayed retry forward when the pending count exceeds the batching
> threshold, which schedule_delayed_work(..., 0) cannot do because it
> leaves an already pending timer unchanged.
I knew this point. Does it matter to schedule a normal case immediately
after an error case (defer to schedule) happened within 100ms?
(Just an open question)
>
> Would it be OK to retain mod_delayed_work() for normal completions,
> changing its queue argument to system_percpu_wq?
OK if above question is yes.
Or both change to use mod_delayed_work()?
>
> With that change, schedule_delayed_work() would select system_percpu_wq
> internally, and mod_delayed_work() would use the same queue explicitly.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-21 0:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-19 20:44 [PATCH rtw-next v3 0/3] wifi: rtl8xxxu: keep RX requests available across transient errors Kim Wooseok via B4 Relay
2026-09-19 20:44 ` [PATCH rtw-next v3 1/3] wifi: rtl8xxxu: free RX skb when URB submission fails Kim Wooseok via B4 Relay
2026-09-19 20:44 ` [PATCH rtw-next v3 2/3] wifi: rtl8xxxu: unwind incomplete receive startup Kim Wooseok via B4 Relay
2026-09-20 3:26 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2026-09-20 8:17 ` Kim Wooseok
2026-09-19 20:44 ` [PATCH rtw-next v3 3/3] wifi: rtl8xxxu: preserve RX requests across recoverable transfer errors Kim Wooseok via B4 Relay
2026-09-20 3:46 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2026-09-20 8:17 ` Kim Wooseok
2026-09-21 0:24 ` Ping-Ke Shih [this message]
2026-09-21 7:58 ` Kim Wooseok
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=8d8e60e260254dc2a2cc1f37cd1b3832@realtek.com \
--to=pkshih@realtek.com \
--cc=5mghybrid@khu.ac.kr \
--cc=Jes.Sorensen@gmail.com \
--cc=kvalo@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@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®