From: Simon Barber <simon@superduper.net>
To: Anirudh Sivaraman <sk.anirudh@gmail.com>
Cc: bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: Enabling Byte Queue Limits in the ath5k wireless driver
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2013 08:01:55 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52517B63.1060705@superduper.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMdC6xYLoCPTJE3sprx=kDpm0bGc_jmf41ez-1G4poMk2EHVFA@mail.gmail.com>
BQL or TQL are open-loop - there is no feedback. The amount of bytes or
total packet transmission time in the queue is counted when packets
enter and leave the queue, and a hard limit of total bytes or total time
in queue is set. When I say time - I mean that on a packet entering the
queue the total time the packet will take to transmit is calculated, and
that time is added to a count to the total time currently in queue. When
a packet has been transmitted the time is subtracted from the total time
in queue. There would be no interference with CODEL running in front of
this.
Simon
On 10/6/2013 6:31 AM, Anirudh Sivaraman wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 11:39 PM, Simon Barber <simon@superduper.net> wrote:
>> BQL does make sense, but TQL would be even better - 'Time Queue Limits'.
>> Which would work based on an estimate of how much time each packet will take
>> to send, and limiting the hardware queue to contain a total mount of 'time'.
>> The purpose of the hardware queue is to mask interrupt and other latencies
>> involved in refilling an empty queue - a time based phenomenon. Hence time
>> is the best metric to control it - with fixed speed interfaced like ethernet
>> bytes=time, but not so on wireless.
>>
> Thank you for your reply. TQL does make more sense for wireless at
> least. However, assuming that someone implement a qdisc like CoDel and
> attaches it to the wireless interface, doesn't TQL (or for that matter
> BQL) lead to two possibly competing control loops (one at the qdisc,
> and one at the device driver)?
>
> Anirudh
>> Simon
>>
>>
>> On 10/3/2013 11:49 AM, Anirudh Sivaraman wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am looking into enabling BQL for the ath5k driver, and was wondering
>>> if anyone here knows of any prior efforts in this direction. In
>>> particular, is BQL even a sensible strategy for wireless drivers?
>>> Thank you in advance for any advice you may have in this regard.
>>>
>>> Anirudh
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bloat-devel mailing list
>>> Bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat-devel
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bloat-devel mailing list
>> Bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-06 15:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-03 18:49 Anirudh Sivaraman
2013-10-06 3:39 ` Simon Barber
2013-10-06 13:31 ` Anirudh Sivaraman
2013-10-06 15:01 ` Simon Barber [this message]
2013-10-06 16:36 ` Anirudh Sivaraman
2013-10-06 21:03 ` Simon Barber
2013-10-08 11:00 ` Anirudh Sivaraman
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=52517B63.1060705@superduper.net \
--to=simon@superduper.net \
--cc=bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=sk.anirudh@gmail.com \
/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