From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [5.9.151.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 081933B260 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 14:35:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1bfWqB-00051S-RC; Thu, 01 Sep 2016 20:35:56 +0200 Message-ID: <1472754954.9608.13.camel@sipsolutions.net> From: Johannes Berg To: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= Cc: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 20:35:54 +0200 In-Reply-To: <871t1379r0.fsf@toke.dk> References: <20160830131548.6014-1-toke@toke.dk> <20160901160312.31540-1-toke@toke.dk> <1472752745.9608.8.camel@sipsolutions.net> <871t1379r0.fsf@toke.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.4-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] [PATCH v5] mac80211: Move reorder-sensitive TX handlers to after TXQ dequeue. X-BeenThere: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 18:35:57 -0000 On Thu, 2016-09-01 at 20:30 +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: > > seq=1,frag=0 > > seq=2,frag=0 > > seq=2,frag=1 > > seq=2,frag=1 > > > > if reordering happened? > > (assuming the last line was supposed to read 'seq=1,frag=1') I did actually mean seq=2,frag=1, since the seqno assignment happened after fragmentation in your patch, and after codel reordering, and would not change the seqno until it encountered a frag=0 packet. Or maybe that was only with the previous version of the patch. > When does fragmentation happen anyway? Is it safe to assume there's > no aggregation when it does? > Yes, fragmented packets are not allowed to be aggregated. johannes