From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
To: Yibo Zhao <yiboz@codeaurora.org>
Cc: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>,
Rajkumar Manoharan <rmanohar@codeaurora.org>,
Kan Yan <kyan@google.com>,
linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT] mac80211: Switch to a virtual time-based airtime scheduler
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2019 10:31:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ftqy41ea.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <753b328855b85f960ceaf974194a7506@codeaurora.org>
Yibo Zhao <yiboz@codeaurora.org> writes:
> On 2019-02-16 01:05, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> This switches the airtime scheduler in mac80211 to use a virtual
>> time-based
>> scheduler instead of the round-robin scheduler used before. This has a
>> couple of advantages:
>>
>> - No need to sync up the round-robin scheduler in firmware/hardware
>> with
>> the round-robin airtime scheduler.
>>
>> - If several stations are eligible for transmission we can schedule
>> both of
>> them; no need to hard-block the scheduling rotation until the head of
>> the
>> queue has used up its quantum.
>>
>> - The check of whether a station is eligible for transmission becomes
>> simpler (in ieee80211_txq_may_transmit()).
>>
>> The drawback is that scheduling becomes slightly more expensive, as we
>> need
>> to maintain an rbtree of TXQs sorted by virtual time. This means that
>> ieee80211_register_airtime() becomes O(logN) in the number of currently
>> scheduled TXQs. However, hopefully this number rarely grows too big
>> (it's
>> only TXQs currently backlogged, not all associated stations), so it
>> shouldn't be too big of an issue.
>>
>> @@ -1831,18 +1830,32 @@ void ieee80211_sta_register_airtime(struct
>> ieee80211_sta *pubsta, u8 tid,
>> {
>> struct sta_info *sta = container_of(pubsta, struct sta_info, sta);
>> struct ieee80211_local *local = sta->sdata->local;
>> + struct ieee80211_txq *txq = sta->sta.txq[tid];
>> u8 ac = ieee80211_ac_from_tid(tid);
>> - u32 airtime = 0;
>> + u64 airtime = 0, weight_sum;
>> +
>> + if (!txq)
>> + return;
>>
>> if (sta->local->airtime_flags & AIRTIME_USE_TX)
>> airtime += tx_airtime;
>> if (sta->local->airtime_flags & AIRTIME_USE_RX)
>> airtime += rx_airtime;
>>
>> + /* Weights scale so the unit weight is 256 */
>> + airtime <<= 8;
>> +
>> spin_lock_bh(&local->active_txq_lock[ac]);
>> +
>> sta->airtime[ac].tx_airtime += tx_airtime;
>> sta->airtime[ac].rx_airtime += rx_airtime;
>> - sta->airtime[ac].deficit -= airtime;
>> +
>> + weight_sum = local->airtime_weight_sum[ac] ?: sta->airtime_weight;
>> +
>> + local->airtime_v_t[ac] += airtime / weight_sum;
> Hi Toke,
>
> Please ignore the previous two broken emails regarding this new proposal
> from me.
>
> It looks like local->airtime_v_t acts like a Tx criteria. Only the
> stations with less airtime than that are valid for Tx. That means there
> are situations, like 50 clients, that some of the stations can be used
> to Tx when putting next_txq in the loop. Am I right?
I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you referring to the case where new
stations appear with a very low (zero) airtime_v_t? That is handled when
the station is enqueued.
>> + sta->airtime[ac].v_t += airtime / sta->airtime_weight;
> Another question. Any plan for taking v_t overflow situation into
> consideration? u64 might be enough for low throughput products but not
> sure for high end products. Something like below for reference:
The unit for the variable is time, not bytes, so it is unaffected by
throughput. 2**64 microseconds is 584554 *years* according to my
'units' binary, so don't think we have to worry too much about this
overflowing ;)
-Toke
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-04 8:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-15 17:05 [RFC/RFT] mac80211: Switch to a virtual time-based airtime scheduler Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-02-15 19:44 ` [Make-wifi-fast] " Dave Taht
2019-03-05 15:45 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-03-06 23:09 ` Rajkumar Manoharan
2019-03-07 9:46 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-03-07 14:27 ` Felix Fietkau
2019-03-08 11:05 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-03-08 18:16 ` Felix Fietkau
2019-03-08 19:06 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-04-04 4:41 ` Yibo Zhao
2019-04-04 4:43 ` Yibo Zhao
2019-04-04 5:00 ` Yibo Zhao
2019-04-04 8:31 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen [this message]
2019-04-04 8:36 ` [Make-wifi-fast] " Dave Taht
2019-04-04 8:50 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-04-09 13:25 ` Yibo Zhao
2019-04-09 20:41 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-04-10 6:35 ` Yibo Zhao
2019-04-10 10:40 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-04-11 3:12 ` Yibo Zhao
2019-04-11 11:24 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-04-12 6:34 ` Yibo Zhao
2019-04-19 15:05 ` Yibo Zhao
2019-04-20 21:15 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-04-30 9:45 ` Yibo Zhao
2019-04-30 10:39 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87ftqy41ea.fsf@toke.dk \
--to=toke@redhat.com \
--cc=kyan@google.com \
--cc=linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=nbd@nbd.name \
--cc=rmanohar@codeaurora.org \
--cc=yiboz@codeaurora.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).