From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-ob0-x244.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4003:c01::244]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1axFzs-0000Km-VW for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 02 May 2016 15:42:57 +0000 Received: by mail-ob0-x244.google.com with SMTP id ds10so4462230obb.3 for ; Mon, 02 May 2016 08:42:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1462201445.5535.247.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> References: <1462125592.5535.194.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> <1462201445.5535.247.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 18:42:35 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Codel] fq_codel_drop vs a udp flood From: Roman Yeryomin List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: Eric Dumazet Cc: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net, "codel@lists.bufferbloat.net" , Dave Taht , ath10k On 2 May 2016 at 18:04, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Mon, 2016-05-02 at 17:09 +0300, Roman Yeryomin wrote: > >> So if I run some UDP download you will just kill me? Sounds broken. >> > > Seriously guys, I never suggesting kill a _task_ but the _flow_ > > Meaning dropping packets. See ? > > If you do not want to drop packets, do not use fq_codel and simply use > bufferbloat pfifo_fast. > I understand what you mean but in case of a flow running through the AP it probably could be considered as "task" I've tried pfifo before, it was better but didn't help much. How much faster pfifo_fast is? Regards, Roman _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k