Re: [v2] ath9k: add MSI support

2018-01-08 Thread Kalle Valo
(Adding AceLan) Daniel Drake writes: > On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Daniel Drake wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:15 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: Can't be fixed in firmware, but it would be good to have confirmation of the hardware behavivour, and maybe some other solution is possibl

Re: [v2] ath9k: add MSI support

2018-01-08 Thread Andy Shevchenko
On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: > (Adding AceLan) > > Daniel Drake writes: > >> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Daniel Drake wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:15 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: > Can't be fixed in firmware, but it would be good to have confirmation > of the

Re: [v2] ath9k: add MSI support

2018-01-08 Thread Daniel Drake
On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 6:24 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: > (Adding AceLan) > > Daniel Drake writes: > >> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Daniel Drake wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:15 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: > Can't be fixed in firmware, but it would be good to have confirmation > of the

Re: [v2] ath9k: add MSI support

2018-01-08 Thread AceLan Kao
Hi Kalle, I'm happy to see Russel's patch can be merged, and I'm willing to rebase and merge those quirks into one commit and submit it again. Although the solution is not perfect, but it's nice to have. Thanks. Best regards, AceLan Kao. 2018-01-09 7:07 GMT+08:00 Daniel Drake : > On Mon, Jan 8,

Re: [v2] ath9k: add MSI support

2018-01-16 Thread Kalle Valo
Russell Hu wrote: > On new Intel platforms like ApolloLake, legacy interrupt mechanism > (INTx) is not supported, so WLAN modules are not working because > interrupts are missing, therefore this patch is to add MSI support to > ath9k. With module paremeter "use_msi=1", ath9k driver would try to

[PATCH v2] ath9k: add MSI support

2017-10-11 Thread Russell Hu
On new Intel platforms like ApolloLake, legacy interrupt mechanism (INTx) is not supported, so WLAN modules are not working because interrupts are missing, therefore this patch is to add MSI support to ath9k. With module paremeter "use_msi=1", ath9k driver would try to use MSI instead of INTx. Si

Re: [v2] ath9k: add MSI support

2017-11-09 Thread Daniel Drake
Hi Russell, > On new Intel platforms like ApolloLake, legacy interrupt mechanism > (INTx) is not supported Could you please share the background on what you are claiming here. I have multiple ApolloLake laptops here with many legacy interrupts being used in /proc/interrupts. I do see this ath9k

Re: [v2] ath9k: add MSI support

2017-11-13 Thread Kalle Valo
Daniel Drake writes: >> On new Intel platforms like ApolloLake, legacy interrupt mechanism >> (INTx) is not supported > > Could you please share the background on what you are claiming here. > I have multiple ApolloLake laptops here with many legacy interrupts > being used in /proc/interrupts. >

Re: [v2] ath9k: add MSI support

2017-11-13 Thread Daniel Drake
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 4:48 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: > Enabling MSI by default is just too invasive, ath9k is used in so many > different enviroments that risk of regressions is high. MSI needs a lot > of testing before we can even consider enabling it by default. And it seems like we already found

Re: [v2] ath9k: add MSI support

2017-11-14 Thread Kalle Valo
Daniel Drake writes: > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 4:48 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Enabling MSI by default is just too invasive, ath9k is used in so many >> different enviroments that risk of regressions is high. MSI needs a lot >> of testing before we can even consider enabling it by default. > > And

Re: [v2] ath9k: add MSI support

2017-11-14 Thread Daniel Drake
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:15 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Can't be fixed in firmware, but it would be good to have confirmation >> of the hardware behavivour, and maybe some other solution is possible? >> Are you following this up within Qualcomm? > > No time to do that right now, sorry. I got severa

Re: [v2] ath9k: add MSI support

2017-12-12 Thread Daniel Drake
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Daniel Drake wrote: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:15 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: >>> Can't be fixed in firmware, but it would be good to have confirmation >>> of the hardware behavivour, and maybe some other solution is possible? >>> Are you following this up within Qualc