From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-x232.google.com (mail-io0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 659173B25E for ; Mon, 9 May 2016 23:30:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-io0-x232.google.com with SMTP id d62so2718452iof.2 for ; Mon, 09 May 2016 20:30:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc; bh=/ynuz4g1Z8sxm41wNIiaAbrPev0rwh+D7c4M/3B7mdU=; b=mdxHo7cMSE6Jx4o+tHS8TCYQdukNSisk0pGXLcuXUrYPS35MHX4Wlg2965OpLtYodv E9RPtHUhlkOYDCh7xUimOZ6FbLAdNjhRMfyUDueNKHMUerGMvo/GA/WCqlaBHDeuoPqr wXadLiXeNg4p1WG1qG0EwSWDX2fgOEr597VgYKoKRHQKud+/FTRbJz9ojhFna3nKPEzZ 5h747Cd3adNxny9l0188+bnmEasbTW8fgdB4ueEv3PakiPshwxtrURbJKlSCcyhSUpcO S6MQtxYkwOnIq4gDxjGssrzf7r5vqFj1vBwnW7BPLFo9gjD68/ddfE1oSmQHh0saGZYS 4b7A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=/ynuz4g1Z8sxm41wNIiaAbrPev0rwh+D7c4M/3B7mdU=; b=kl3YW0V8SPa9ry+H6xUPH/aUN0BvnGKqoDWSkHFfBUaTBrOKJE8db0ZaQ5Uc23xXYU HbzbNzXiC74vtbEsFSOXmWG7lRPVe0wEAEUPIF952+jUuNMSIvVjwE7vYcTXMhYMe+3R iLPuHcNgu+qFlZs0fD7P7DSyUoGf4pdrHK987/x03UnBhm56NwXQslnT/OxAyDWLLisA HET06Ftaq1ZOOGZxAAickUFlvlKaLKY7OA0XJH+f3KEyB+OXqQGcRScU/N0Ni1lUZWN/ aCsD4l45HBMUDrzZN6JSfMj/g++nwDXpgpMxAi+dJyiOXbw+Ymrl6ueDphzsLRxBFDD+ 3H/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FUTbB4Atfrv2i4PpCWVLq6J/x6DqNgiG4AN2tVzLD/fUfvs/p/Xf1lpmZwRAYsKG16knmKxE9QY36z10g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.144.135 with SMTP id s129mr40156620iod.165.1462851056897; Mon, 09 May 2016 20:30:56 -0700 (PDT) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.36.113.3 with HTTP; Mon, 9 May 2016 20:30:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <871t5bpkc7.fsf@toke.dk> <6ADC1A9D-72C9-47A5-BDC7-94C14ED34379@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 20:30:56 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: kCkh5y3Apcc-Ia5RkN-5jM41dKo Message-ID: From: Adrian Chadd To: Dave Taht Cc: Jonathan Morton , make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net, "ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org" , =?UTF-8?B?VG9rZSBIw7hpbGFuZC1Kw7hyZ2Vuc2Vu?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] [ath9k-devel] Diagram of the ath9k TX path 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: Tue, 10 May 2016 03:30:57 -0000 Hi, So: * the hardware can give us a per-AC transmit opportunity; * software queuing needs to handle the per-STA transmit opportunity; * they (and I followed convention after testing) found the "best" compromise was to hardware queue up to two frames, which we could probably do slightly more of at higher MCS rates for "reasons", but if we're getting enough packets come in then if the hardware queues get drained slower than we can fill them, we naturally aggregate traffic. So it actually works pretty well in practice. The general aim is to keep up to ~8ms of aggregates queued, and that's typically two aggregate frames so we don't bust the block-ack window. -adrian