From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay5-d.mail.gandi.net (relay5-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0984B3CB36 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 05:19:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Originating-IP: 209.85.216.171 Received: from mail-qt0-f171.google.com (mail-qt0-f171.google.com [209.85.216.171]) (Authenticated sender: me@louie.lu) by relay5-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E1E581C0005 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 09:19:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qt0-f171.google.com with SMTP id j7-v6so1023129qtp.2 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 02:19:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51DB3CoIMC921jCCEU4mwd1lgL1B8CgT7uHKtJgH2WFQcFP6vWlY X/UsGrQ6cdgqC2SHX8v6Z2tkqzACHSB1cXEIVJI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdYvMD3aEVCJ5r3FizyZm1mkhf+XLHsa+mAIVlUOo5rn72my3sbG9VZ0EstEFei3se5714L2vP7THmaQlIHF9jo= X-Received: by 2002:a0c:d7c3:: with SMTP id g3-v6mr20532359qvj.85.1537262389727; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 02:19:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Louie Lu Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 17:19:45 +0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: [Make-wifi-fast] Some ath9k internal structure question 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: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 09:19:52 -0000 Hi all, For what know, `struct ath_atx_tid` is the queue for per station per tid queue, and `struct ath_txq` is to describe the hardware queue, is that correct? Since I'm looking down the wake_tx_queue function, inside the `ath_txq_schedule`: acq = &sc->cur_chan->acq[txq->mac80211_qnum]; tid_list = &acq->acq_new or &acq->acq_old; tid = list_first_entry(tid_list, struct ath_atx_tid, list); at the third line, it will get the first tid entry inside the tid list with txq's AC number (the RR parts), after all, the `txq` is decoupled from the tid, the packet for the tid is inside tid->txq, not the parameter txq one, and the parameter txq only provide `qnum` and `complete_q` for after using. Is that correct, or did I miss some parts? Thanks, Louie.