From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-ob0-x241.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4003:c01::241]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ateWU-0004tO-Cz for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 17:05:42 +0000 Received: by mail-ob0-x241.google.com with SMTP id o7so1702547obl.2 for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 10:05:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87k2jtk3wt.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> References: <1460129643950.46282@qti.qualcomm.com> <1460174525702.66744@qti.qualcomm.com> <1460905574286.42282@qti.qualcomm.com> <87k2jtk3wt.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 20:05:21 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: ath10k performance, master branch from 20160407 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: "Valo, Kalle" Cc: Rajkumar Manoharan , "michal.kazior@tieto.com" , "ath10k@lists.infradead.org" , "Manoharan, Rajkumar" On 19 April 2016 at 18:35, Valo, Kalle wrote: > Michal Kazior writes: > >> On 19 April 2016 at 09:31, Roman Yeryomin wrote: >>> On 19 April 2016 at 08:28, Michal Kazior wrote: >>> >>>> If my hunch is right there's no easy (and proper) fix for that now. >>>> >>>> One of the patchset patches (ath10k: implement wake_tx_queue) starts >>>> to use mac80211 software queuing. This introduces extra induced >>>> latency and I'm guessing it results in fill-in-then-drain sequences in >>>> some cases which end up being long enough to make fq_codel_drop more >>>> work than normal. >>>> >>>> This is required for other changes and MU-MIMO performance >>>> improvements so this patch can't be removed. >>> >>> But qca988x doesn't support MU-MIMO, AFAIK. >> >> Correct. >> >> >>> Can this be made chip dependent? >> >> I guess it could but it'd arguably make the driver more complex and >> harder to maintain. What we want is a long-term fix, not a short-term >> one. > > But we should never go backwards and TCP dropping from 750 Mbps to ~550 > Mbps is a huge drop, so this is not ok. We have to do something to fix > this, be it reverting the wake_tx_queue support, somehow disabling it by > default or something. I would agree with Kalle here. This looks like very serious regression. But I'm afraid I can only help with testing here. Regards, Roman _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k