From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A85FEC388F3 for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 06:58:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79FB121783 for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 06:58:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="O0j2BUeT" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732658AbfJAG6B (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Oct 2019 02:58:01 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.120]:34830 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725777AbfJAG6B (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Oct 2019 02:58:01 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1569913079; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=GRAFW8/U7zXvEEyNRQQ4ESdCPCLNo9vrPnN6FAlCs3Q=; b=O0j2BUeTO2vd31a7F8YG4FJwBov7MyipGOY9E/pVoi4MspFxEP8GcjbrZesF1jPiqcHqoc FbDLiMzoMoUH5kPXH3eQxqFoyzlrdldfrrKrgfe9PdXhZyI8F75jhc+C2EoI4yDs0Xi+bD VyCtWBLVydq+pyJyEkWcSqQi6iQBRm0= Received: from mail-lj1-f199.google.com (mail-lj1-f199.google.com [209.85.208.199]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-203-UBeTJqwLM4SuwMpva5oFWQ-1; Tue, 01 Oct 2019 02:57:58 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-f199.google.com with SMTP id h19so3830904ljc.5 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 23:57:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=FkyKJAiKEgiIJtm1wmYNEnaa9QuHfBYZjrXStMrtpN4=; b=dUyn0iwTFxSKP1NVgztxCK6OZ/0anyaZ5hFLuCr91jnYKzJIimxs5RvLztvuzjHdbC n1gSHt99Szf75IQ/T9STk+ibXVBhs5Y0rqreZB8UR1PnUMnOkk3hA4bggfY8xCrDprS+ 5g98XITwvqYp1B+9pooXgUGFenL/VuDQ+MfB1wyHZyZUtv+ZMdqNe88j1heGGyTYI8pL XdYlBOtUJ6+07m23WuyhYOFEyPUWt2kLysfqTzt68D/z0lvvOktWjZrXfE77HdmaTqSU Def5xfM9dZ5CPi+6NDdvhe3zsL8KVdEiFxhN8qwmKo4yoeqswvIe9in5AfpmgWa32IG6 T4VA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXhK6/tGW83aUKwUxbEOdlqJmCCi61v3mXVUU2R87P1RX11VMjW P+qu4b4yvCKDRoU/EdipUWYmkjTzG6Iq6cVGqGE0r+8kHlAKwmfQEjFJ3dUFznOt3Izk89tOIEZ 3zg20IVPbBImZt5TUvFersvUwCAI= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4149:: with SMTP id c9mr857954lfi.128.1569913076365; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 23:57:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx74ouQXfD14eaZUyj6r+EeRdMOKORTSfS/bmZWcxUp8rc28I/codK30MLL5lUb9GzxFTpNfw== X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4149:: with SMTP id c9mr857932lfi.128.1569913076182; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 23:57:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alrua-x1.borgediget.toke.dk ([2a00:7660:6da:443::2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c26sm359795lfp.20.2019.09.30.23.57.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 30 Sep 2019 23:57:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by alrua-x1.borgediget.toke.dk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DA1D718063D; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 08:57:53 +0200 (CEST) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= To: Kan Yan Cc: Yibo Zhao , Felix Fietkau , Johannes Berg , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net, John Crispin , Lorenzo Bianconi , linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT 4/4] mac80211: Apply Airtime-based Queue Limit (AQL) on packet dequeue In-Reply-To: References: <156889576422.191202.5906619710809654631.stgit@alrua-x1> <156889576869.191202.510507546538322707.stgit@alrua-x1> <08f0ed6e-b746-9689-6dc8-7c0ea705666d@nbd.name> <87wodv19jl.fsf@toke.dk> <87tv8z13wv.fsf@toke.dk> <87r2421d4f.fsf@toke.dk> <87muemykqn.fsf@toke.dk> X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2019 08:57:53 +0200 Message-ID: <87imp9vtou.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MC-Unique: UBeTJqwLM4SuwMpva5oFWQ-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Kan Yan writes: >> I guess the risk is lower when with a 24ms per-iface limit; but with >> enough stations I guess it could still happen, no? So we should probably >> handle this case... > Each txq (per sta, per tid) is allowed to release at least the lower > AQL limit amount of packet (default 4ms), which is not affected by > other station's PS behavior and 4ms should be sufficient for most use > cases. Ah, I thought you'd meant each station can queue MIN(4ms, 24ms-). I see that is not the case; it's up to 10ms as long as the total is less than 20ms, and up to 4ms otherwise.=20 > The 24ms per-interface limit is an optimization to get good benchmark > score in peak performance test, which usually only involve 1-2 > stations. Gotta get those benchmark numbers in ;) > The higher limit probably won't matter anymore when there are many > stations. I haven't noticed side effects due to PS behavior in the > ChromiumOS version. Still, it is better to be able to take frames in > PS queue in to account, As long as one station always gets its 4ms, I'm not too worried about PS; but that was not the case in my patch :) >> Cool. Are you going to submit a ported version of your implementation? >> Then we can work from the two submissions and see if we can't converge >> on something... > Working on porting, should have something ready before the end of this > week. Great! -Toke