From: David Lang <david@lang.hm>
To: Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@tieto.com>
Cc: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>,
make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net,
"codel@lists.bufferbloat.net" <codel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Codel] [Make-wifi-fast] [RFC/RFT] mac80211: implement fq_codel for software queuing
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 18:29:53 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1603211827190.26766@nftneq.ynat.uz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+BoTQk37=KH+q89FTKgve0-yJ+ChiZGvVbGC39-aNpre9JShg@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 29 Feb 2016, Michal Kazior wrote:
>> Our intent is to continue to improve the flent test suite to be able
>> to generate repeatable tests, track relevant wifi behaviors and pull
>> relevant data back, graphed over time (of test) and time (over test
>> runs). A problem with udp flood tests is that tcp traffic is always
>> bidirectional (data vs acks), so a naive thought would be, that yes,
>> you should get half the bandwidth you get with a udp flood test.
>
> I don't see why you'd be doomed to get only half the bandwidth because
> of that? Sure, Wi-Fi is half-duplex but transmit time for ACKs is a
> lot smaller than transmit time for the data.
The difference is actually far less than you think. Each transmission has a
fixed-length header and quiet times that were designed in the days of 802.11b
(1-11Mb) and if you are transmitting a wide 802.11ac signal at a couple hundred
Mb, you can find that the time taken to transmit even full packets is a
surprisingly small percentage of the total transmit time.
David Lang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-22 1:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1456492163-11437-1-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com>
2016-02-26 14:32 ` [Codel] Fwd: " Dave Taht
2016-02-26 19:27 ` [Codel] " Michal Kazior
2016-02-26 22:20 ` Dave Taht
2016-02-29 12:35 ` Michal Kazior
2016-03-22 1:29 ` David Lang [this message]
2016-03-22 3:14 ` [Codel] [Make-wifi-fast] " Aaron Wood
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
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/codel.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.02.1603211827190.26766@nftneq.ynat.uz \
--to=david@lang.hm \
--cc=codel@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=dave.taht@gmail.com \
--cc=make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=michal.kazior@tieto.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