From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:72ef::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 355E63CB3E for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2018 05:52:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1f96Ej-0000vz-U0; Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:52:18 +0200 Message-ID: <1524131536.3024.16.camel@sipsolutions.net> From: Johannes Berg To: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= , make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:52:16 +0200 In-Reply-To: <8736zr1rjh.fsf@toke.dk> (sfid-20180419_112023_143492_C28A4BC7) References: <20180219170224.14816-1-toke@toke.dk> <8736zr1rjh.fsf@toke.dk> (sfid-20180419_112023_143492_C28A4BC7) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.26.6 (3.26.6-1.fc27) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] [PATCH 0/3] Export TXQ parameters and statistics via nl80211 X-BeenThere: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 09:52:20 -0000 On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 11:20 +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: > Toke Høiland-Jørgensen writes: > > > This series adds TXQ parameters and statistics that were previously only > > available through debugfs to the nl80211 userspace interface and the > > cfg80211 kernel interface. Patches for iw to print the statistics and > > change the settings are included. > > So this patch set is now three months old. Any chance of actually > getting it, you know, merged? Or is there something more I need to do? :) I was just thinking about it yesterday, "sighing" that I'll need to make a decision even though I don't really know it well and can't even say if another API would be better :-) I think I'll take it, but I guess I'll need to review it again. johannes