From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2A463B29E for ; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 05:55:09 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1573124109; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Q4pL4jpvKYALp1ZmBjwLiX5kLjNlt9sKgPX3+ptzxho=; b=hBeWLmJg0N+Sf+bzGXoQaVHGqCWgT97zgYCwFcRSBCoE3SlMEdwEGsU6h6Cw29cNgQ+NM2 Pit1L9Vbtc92+V9g0eIJ+z+80vrNCUvBPMKepBnEzXDGJgd1RZriEo2TPIAwYQiYj1j4Rq 7JfU6WImq3/26VM+2L6DgbQct/jvecQ= Received: from mail-ed1-f71.google.com (mail-ed1-f71.google.com [209.85.208.71]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-217-B6HnbeffPKe5qgYoMK7qzg-1; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 05:55:07 -0500 Received: by mail-ed1-f71.google.com with SMTP id h51so1122766ede.9 for ; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 02:55:07 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=Q4pL4jpvKYALp1ZmBjwLiX5kLjNlt9sKgPX3+ptzxho=; b=ZzAqP2UPDatpUxlGbZ4U7PnOik32ZlinI3cGN3LWqz19VO9+V+mtg31jPumGjHZ2yk tnWpR6H0lHxKkPjaDxVlQEjtqUHn1LRVJuYgzAyb5NUbI6bSQy2VPxqcKpkTO71Q6fhv zA8MJNV1b0pNFEMJIYgtP2uMkZCaD77FyUmN4IpSCVWXIWGo4eAmmp0300x0GDuJLuZG AR0NjVZqG1l9GP4NwA2QTOy2EvkQ9fq+od6bmAf3RV2FZYIoXOHE1cvyk06O4Rsov337 axnOdC+FdWOHRvyvfVvt4G7iWxxsAZmZ6Wizm6cZgfHMlPmFJaRuVaVQ3g/EEHAd8L2Q 38wA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX8xa5RPoY97DCkQq2mpP6qcaMTkOiJTR36TfY0c4nc5OagO5fR 0Bo2FNpBLZsDnlLwhqYfsGKa2LWyykoAqv8h3XGv9cK4R/pWP9qusQKUfMBskbwL4bDcQWOvGn4 wCo859tn+1rKPBS+nHxIMbBYCctiR8H7cRwk= X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:36e:: with SMTP id rs14mr2343750ejb.330.1573124106644; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 02:55:06 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyEpX0MtxlKhDZdMCOWAf1U4DukYDNvzzciu6G2l7tjeepUbmDJuI635gQspWdEjys3zMh9Jg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:36e:: with SMTP id rs14mr2343731ejb.330.1573124106481; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 02:55:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from alrua-x1.borgediget.toke.dk ([2a00:7660:6da:443::2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x6sm54134edc.50.2019.11.07.02.55.05 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 07 Nov 2019 02:55:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by alrua-x1.borgediget.toke.dk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2B6091818B5; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 11:55:05 +0100 (CET) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= To: Kan Yan Cc: Johannes Berg , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Make-Wifi-fast , ath10k@lists.infradead.org, John Crispin , Lorenzo Bianconi , Felix Fietkau , Rajkumar Manoharan , Kevin Hayes In-Reply-To: References: <157182473951.150713.7978051149956899705.stgit@toke.dk> X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2019 11:55:05 +0100 Message-ID: <874kzggdme.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MC-Unique: B6HnbeffPKe5qgYoMK7qzg-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] [PATCH v6 0/4] Add Airtime Queue Limits (AQL) to mac80211 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, 07 Nov 2019 10:55:09 -0000 Kan Yan writes: > Patchset v6 works for me with ath10k driver. AQL does its job as > expected and tests show very significant reduction in latency in > congested environment. The txq stuck issue in patchset v4 got fixed. Awesome! Thank you for testing! > However, the device's total pending airtime count still underflows > sometimes. Even though it doesn't cause apparent side effect, there is > some issue with the pending airtime update and needs further > debugging. Huh, it *under*flows? That's... interesting. Cloned SKBs? Or maybe the tx_time_est field is being set in some other place? Could I get you to add a dump_stack() to the underflow test so we can get an idea of where that happens? -Toke