From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ve0-x22d.google.com (mail-ve0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c01::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC3592007D0 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 2013 06:31:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ve0-f173.google.com with SMTP id cz12so3168488veb.4 for ; Sun, 06 Oct 2013 06:31:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=9Ncoid0DqmrCi3F6SfZ+8Q+9crWSOkmm+EJ9Uefm680=; b=GIylnIUj7tleBLD9cmWxZtmm7Ozn4kAJ3Vzj+i1Qfk6zcy1ze7FTqeLT7AjOwHyQSe gwQJi+TOaWh9tTz4QAR7Yw0TDKtiMgDiVC38Bb5MdL9cKVmN4Oh3y+xohmiA9mETyDOJ gTbyOhIDPE1eXZlzS9vMJcCl3tbsCjsHffLOxAdX6dk0Xy7usb3Hqn0FvCnsstD/+dtj ekvue0gEXB3jzgWVAXuxEL4BYBZNEaFdt1wXPYLmeJ7h4jWSLJaN1s8GVaRKGS2sgEzK PEbf+dKgsC2/XMQ6xyWKu6ak5MTmrO/lp/Ckt3RiFpSH1GJWZHJCjDtuDwAIwOTMy2fZ 8l4A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.187.138 with SMTP id fs10mr17516922vdc.10.1381066317492; Sun, 06 Oct 2013 06:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.74.137 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Oct 2013 06:31:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5250DB8F.4060004@superduper.net> References: <5250DB8F.4060004@superduper.net> Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2013 09:31:57 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Enabling Byte Queue Limits in the ath5k wireless driver From: Anirudh Sivaraman To: Simon Barber Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-BeenThere: bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers working on AQM, device drivers, and networking stacks" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2013 13:31:59 -0000 On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 11:39 PM, Simon Barber 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