* Re: [Make-wifi-fast] Make-wifi-fast Digest, Vol 29, Issue 9
[not found] <mailman.0.1505318401.16618.make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net>
@ 2017-09-19 5:36 ` Jon Pike
2017-09-19 9:38 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jon Pike @ 2017-09-19 5:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: make-wifi-fast
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2511 bytes --]
Hey Toke...
Did you notice a guy responded to your commit on LEDE-DEV? He's reporting
no speed problems on his C2600... This is turning into a head scratcher.
I was going to finally get back to this thread and suggest that at least
the C5/7 special build that rOOt manages on the LEDE forum could benefit
from this, (uh, except for that pesky lack of latency reduction?) after it
gets reverted from the nightly.
Now, I'm just wondering what benifits there would be with this. I realize
I've pretty much forgotten now what kinds of bufferbloat reduction and or
airtime fairness bits ath10k had before, or would have with this. So if
you wouldn't mind going over that again, at least I'd have the right info
to pass along on what the benifits would be... assuming it's reccomendable
at this point.
On Sep 13, 2017 9:00 AM, <make-wifi-fast-request@lists.bufferbloat.net>
wrote:
> Send Make-wifi-fast mailing list submissions to
> make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> make-wifi-fast-request@lists.bufferbloat.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> make-wifi-fast-owner@lists.bufferbloat.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Make-wifi-fast digest..."
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Make-wifi-fast Digest, Vol 29, Issue 1
> (Toke Høiland-Jørgensen)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>
> To: Adrian Popescu <adriannnpopescu@gmail.com>
> Cc: Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant <kevin@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk>,
> make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net
> Bcc:
> Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 19:03:24 +0200
> Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] Make-wifi-fast Digest, Vol 29, Issue 1
>
>
> On 12 September 2017 16:03:36 CEST, Adrian Popescu <
> adriannnpopescu@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I was testing on QCA9*9*80, not QCA9*8*80. It probably works fine on
> >C7. It
> >doesn't work on the C2600.
>
> Ah, right. Bugger. Could you confirm that the latest nightly is broken?
> Then I'll ask John to revert the patch...
>
> -Toke
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Make-wifi-fast mailing list
> Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3839 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Make-wifi-fast] Make-wifi-fast Digest, Vol 29, Issue 9
2017-09-19 5:36 ` [Make-wifi-fast] Make-wifi-fast Digest, Vol 29, Issue 9 Jon Pike
@ 2017-09-19 9:38 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2017-09-19 12:17 ` Adrian Popescu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen @ 2017-09-19 9:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jon Pike; +Cc: make-wifi-fast
Jon Pike <jonpike54@gmail.com> writes:
> Hey Toke...
>
> Did you notice a guy responded to your commit on LEDE-DEV? He's reporting
> no speed problems on his C2600... This is turning into a head
> scratcher.
Yeah, that is odd. Not really sure what to do about it at this point;
maybe just leave it in and see if more people complain?
> I was going to finally get back to this thread and suggest that at
> least the C5/7 special build that rOOt manages on the LEDE forum could
> benefit from this, (uh, except for that pesky lack of latency
> reduction?) after it gets reverted from the nightly.
>
> Now, I'm just wondering what benifits there would be with this. I
> realize I've pretty much forgotten now what kinds of bufferbloat
> reduction and or airtime fairness bits ath10k had before, or would
> have with this. So if you wouldn't mind going over that again, at
> least I'd have the right info to pass along on what the benifits would
> be... assuming it's reccomendable at this point.
I don't have any ath10k cards in my own testbed, so I don't have a good
dataset for the potential gains. Not sure if someone else on the list
has done comparisons and can share results?
-Toke
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Make-wifi-fast] Make-wifi-fast Digest, Vol 29, Issue 9
2017-09-19 9:38 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
@ 2017-09-19 12:17 ` Adrian Popescu
2017-09-19 12:32 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Adrian Popescu @ 2017-09-19 12:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen; +Cc: Jon Pike, make-wifi-fast
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1658 bytes --]
I'll compile again from the latest sources to test again.
Please don't revert the patch because of my report.
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk>
wrote:
> Jon Pike <jonpike54@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Hey Toke...
> >
> > Did you notice a guy responded to your commit on LEDE-DEV? He's
> reporting
> > no speed problems on his C2600... This is turning into a head
> > scratcher.
>
> Yeah, that is odd. Not really sure what to do about it at this point;
> maybe just leave it in and see if more people complain?
>
> > I was going to finally get back to this thread and suggest that at
> > least the C5/7 special build that rOOt manages on the LEDE forum could
> > benefit from this, (uh, except for that pesky lack of latency
> > reduction?) after it gets reverted from the nightly.
> >
> > Now, I'm just wondering what benifits there would be with this. I
> > realize I've pretty much forgotten now what kinds of bufferbloat
> > reduction and or airtime fairness bits ath10k had before, or would
> > have with this. So if you wouldn't mind going over that again, at
> > least I'd have the right info to pass along on what the benifits would
> > be... assuming it's reccomendable at this point.
>
> I don't have any ath10k cards in my own testbed, so I don't have a good
> dataset for the potential gains. Not sure if someone else on the list
> has done comparisons and can share results?
>
> -Toke
> _______________________________________________
> Make-wifi-fast mailing list
> Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2420 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Make-wifi-fast] Make-wifi-fast Digest, Vol 29, Issue 9
2017-09-19 12:17 ` Adrian Popescu
@ 2017-09-19 12:32 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2017-09-19 20:51 ` Adrian Popescu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen @ 2017-09-19 12:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adrian Popescu; +Cc: Jon Pike, make-wifi-fast
Adrian Popescu <adriannnpopescu@gmail.com> writes:
> I'll compile again from the latest sources to test again.
Awesome, thanks! :)
-Toke
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Make-wifi-fast] Make-wifi-fast Digest, Vol 29, Issue 9
2017-09-19 12:32 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
@ 2017-09-19 20:51 ` Adrian Popescu
2017-09-19 21:10 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Adrian Popescu @ 2017-09-19 20:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen; +Cc: Jon Pike, make-wifi-fast
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 427 bytes --]
It seems to behave as expected when built from the latest sources. The
performance seems to be back to normal. It needs more testing.
The patch should be left in the tree.
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk>
wrote:
> Adrian Popescu <adriannnpopescu@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > I'll compile again from the latest sources to test again.
>
> Awesome, thanks! :)
>
> -Toke
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 902 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Make-wifi-fast] Make-wifi-fast Digest, Vol 29, Issue 9
2017-09-19 20:51 ` Adrian Popescu
@ 2017-09-19 21:10 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen @ 2017-09-19 21:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adrian Popescu; +Cc: Jon Pike, make-wifi-fast
Adrian Popescu <adriannnpopescu@gmail.com> writes:
> It seems to behave as expected when built from the latest sources. The
> performance seems to be back to normal. It needs more testing.
>
> The patch should be left in the tree.
Cool, thanks for testing :)
-Toke
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-09-19 21:10 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <mailman.0.1505318401.16618.make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net>
2017-09-19 5:36 ` [Make-wifi-fast] Make-wifi-fast Digest, Vol 29, Issue 9 Jon Pike
2017-09-19 9:38 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2017-09-19 12:17 ` Adrian Popescu
2017-09-19 12:32 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2017-09-19 20:51 ` Adrian Popescu
2017-09-19 21:10 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox