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 D39CE3BA8E for ; Mon, 7 May 2018 17:20:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from ) id 1fFnYY-0004LZ-Hm; Mon, 07 May 2018 23:20:26 +0200 Message-ID: <1525728025.6222.0.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: Mon, 07 May 2018 23:20:25 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <20180219170224.14816-1-toke@toke.dk> <20180219170224.14816-2-toke@toke.dk> (sfid-20180219_180300_682375_800CE1A2) <1525720384.22388.2.camel@sipsolutions.net> 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 1/3] cfg80211: Expose TXQ stats and parameters to userspace 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: Mon, 07 May 2018 21:20:28 -0000 On Mon, 2018-05-07 at 23:19 +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: > > On 7 May 2018 21:13:04 CEST, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 18:02 +0100, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: > > > This adds support for exporting the mac80211 TXQ stats via nl80211 by > > > way of a nested TXQ stats attribute, as well as for configuring the > > > quantum and limits that were previously only changeable through > > > > debugfs. > > > > So I finally (sorry) decided to apply this, but I get a few issues with > > it (aside from trivial rebase issues). If you're not able to fix them > > now let me know and I can: > > Great! I'll rebase and fix those and resend :) > > Is the iw patch fine as-is? Good question, let me review it :-) johannes