From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Cc: Luca Muscariello <luca.muscariello@gmail.com>,
"make-wifi-fast\@lists.bufferbloat.net"
<make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] Thoughts on tackling airtime fairness
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 18:40:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87mvnwk0pr.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw6WpvfNi3RZU_osLWPH8hns0LOyWDFM9zs6ESbEde3_Xw@mail.gmail.com> (Dave Taht's message of "Wed, 11 May 2016 09:29:18 -0700")
>> My own foci are going to be around trying to rip every source of
>> potential latency out of the current system: be it deferred
>> interrupts, bad rate control information, overlong txops, excessive
>> retries, insufficient packet loss, busting the block ack window, and
>> quashing stations grabbing too much airtime...
>
> and oh, yea, queuing delay. :)
What's that? ;)
>> and then adding back in "bandwidth" from there. We have enough
>> bandwidth in wifi nowadays, just now narrow enough time slices to feed
>> many stations sanely.
>
> Bandwidth = rate/interval. Humans have a terrible tendency to using
> big intervals, like seconds... I'd like to focus on calculating
> bandwidth as rate/(minimal achievable txop under contention) rather
> than maximal.
Yes, well, it's a tradeoff to a certain extent. But sure, latency is
key; hence the idea to use an FQ-CoDel-based scheduler rather than
simply do round-robin. And I figure getting the aggregate size down to a
manageable size is another angle of attack.
-Toke
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-11 16:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-11 12:19 Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2016-05-11 12:55 ` Luca Muscariello
2016-05-11 13:45 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2016-05-11 14:48 ` Luca Muscariello
2016-05-11 15:10 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2016-05-11 15:17 ` David Lang
2016-05-11 15:20 ` David Lang
2016-05-11 15:28 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2016-05-11 15:33 ` Luca Muscariello
2016-05-11 16:19 ` Dave Taht
2016-05-11 16:29 ` Dave Taht
2016-05-11 16:40 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen [this message]
2016-05-11 16:33 ` Luca Muscariello
2016-05-11 15:07 ` David Lang
2016-05-12 15:59 ` Dave Taht
2016-05-11 15:04 ` David Lang
2016-05-11 16:09 ` Luca Muscariello
2016-05-11 16:41 ` Dave Taht
2016-05-11 18:13 ` Dave Taht
2016-05-12 7:26 ` Michal Kazior
2016-05-12 8:21 ` Luca Muscariello
2016-05-12 8:40 ` David Lang
2016-05-12 8:48 ` Michal Kazior
2016-05-11 18:28 ` Luca Muscariello
2016-05-11 18:35 ` Luca Muscariello
2016-05-11 15:03 ` David Lang
2016-05-11 15:15 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2016-05-11 15:24 ` David Lang
2016-05-11 16:35 ` moeller0
2016-05-11 23:25 ` David Lang
2016-05-12 6:41 ` moeller0
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/make-wifi-fast.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87mvnwk0pr.fsf@toke.dk \
--to=toke@toke.dk \
--cc=dave.taht@gmail.com \
--cc=luca.muscariello@gmail.com \
--cc=make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net \
/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