From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-pz0-f43.google.com (mail-pz0-f43.google.com
	[209.85.210.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
	Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK))
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D9AF200AA1;
	Mon, 27 Aug 2012 04:37:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by daku36 with SMTP id u36so3329650dak.16
	for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 04:37:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date
	:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=ANEUgtnP8rIOJGe2LOTFySnV4KNgC9Ok3bl10HOgutQ=;
	b=HOGma7nZNfnRpxMFypSnd20rSPTtAN2gOWvc+QQ/ps7fhkbHPvjmOmRKr1+XAEjrU7
	9Zi68yr0h5c4nN1Hpnncrt66wFAzxtf6Vm8sh1d+S7cOrF54c6Z9fiQpyI2LDzVVKLlH
	AXGmMyBjW+n0KHu0vjCJPVtcqyd0QGSGX31rp/dJfxUHtzJqCTuTdIa/G6BDoOsYyC2n
	UYIQq9l4+ZNOffjxNhBJfV29r8saJ+7AMYSucOpzjlMXHMcn3AA7S5W8ZrEwOBWV5mU4
	WWHlPvmt0h7syZkB4RIcXWSVhzscfvpKFnK/zRxMus8t5/xslTlTidUJ7xOBFZFfls1/
	fOMw==
Received: by 10.68.129.131 with SMTP id nw3mr33804182pbb.43.1346067429461;
	Mon, 27 Aug 2012 04:37:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.10.4.249] (0127ahost2.starwoodbroadband.com. [12.105.246.2])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id
	rz10sm14538546pbc.32.2012.08.27.04.37.07
	(version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 27 Aug 2012 04:37:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw7XKwRtESqfiXsrkznoX2KRCkoHZifyjHMtZTJV1Yhzqg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA93jw7=K8Vvp6N5qYZ8gaODaFyZtAEjGyQe2BDh9-RBsvVHcQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1345538298.5158.401.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
	<CAA93jw7XKwRtESqfiXsrkznoX2KRCkoHZifyjHMtZTJV1Yhzqg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 04:37:05 -0700
Message-ID: <1346067425.2420.167.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net, cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net,
	Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>
Subject: Re: [Codel] coping with memory limitations and packet flooding in
 codel and fq_codel
X-BeenThere: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: CoDel AQM discussions <codel.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/codel>,
	<mailto:codel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/codel>
List-Post: <mailto:codel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:codel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/codel>,
	<mailto:codel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 11:37:10 -0000

On Sun, 2012-08-26 at 14:36 -0700, Dave Taht wrote:

> From looking over the history of this idea, it does seem to be a good
> idea for small devices with potentially big queues.
> 
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg176967.html
> 
> That said I do tend to agree with davem's summary in fixing the
> wifi drivers in the first place. The current allocation in the ath9k driver
> doesn't make any sense in the first place, which (to me) implies magic
> lies underneath that I'm reluctant to fiddle with, without deep knowledge
> of how the ath9k driver behaves with wep/wpa/ampdus, etc.
> 

Problem is some hardware cannot do this in a smart way, without paying
the price of a sometime expensive copy.

Thats why I refined this idea to actually trigger only if current
memory needs are above a threshold.

If packets are received and immediately consumed, without potentially
staying a long time in a queue, it doesnt really matter they use 200 or
400% more ram than the rightly sized packets.