From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
To: ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
Subject: [ath9k-devel] [PATCH 2/2] ath9k: Add more recv stats.
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2012 18:51:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F7F1F13.8060003@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F7C652D.5050702@candelatech.com>
On 2012-04-04 5:13 PM, Ben Greear wrote:
> On 04/04/2012 05:01 AM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>
>>> + * @rx_beacons: No. of beacons received.
>>> + * @rx_frags: No. of rx-fragements received.
>> Why should the driver keep track of those last two?
>
> Well, for instance, I often see around 5Mbps of total rx bytes
> (as counted by the NIC), but much less transmitted. And this is
> with stations sending to stations.
>
> I was trying to figure out where the extra packets come from. It
> seems beacons is a lot of it so it seemed worth counting. And maybe
> fragments count towards that too since there would be more overhead???
>
> As for rx-frags, just seemed useful to know how many frags
> were received. My understanding is that this is like receiving
> 1/2 of a packet at a time...so if we wanted to know how many
> real packets the NIC received, we'd need to take frags v/s non-frags
> into account. The current logic that counts 'all-packets' for
> the rx path is counting individual fragments, I think.
>
> At least for beacons, as long as they are always passed up
> the stack, I can count them in the mac80211 layer instead if
> you prefer.
When you only need the packet type based counters for debugging stuff,
why not just create a monitor mode interface and count in user space?
I think that would make more sense, since these counters are irrelevant
for most users, and avoiding unnecessary work in the rx path is useful
for performance reasons.
- Felix
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
To: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath9k-devel@venema.h4ckr.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ath9k: Add more recv stats.
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2012 18:51:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F7F1F13.8060003@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F7C652D.5050702@candelatech.com>
On 2012-04-04 5:13 PM, Ben Greear wrote:
> On 04/04/2012 05:01 AM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>
>>> + * @rx_beacons: No. of beacons received.
>>> + * @rx_frags: No. of rx-fragements received.
>> Why should the driver keep track of those last two?
>
> Well, for instance, I often see around 5Mbps of total rx bytes
> (as counted by the NIC), but much less transmitted. And this is
> with stations sending to stations.
>
> I was trying to figure out where the extra packets come from. It
> seems beacons is a lot of it so it seemed worth counting. And maybe
> fragments count towards that too since there would be more overhead???
>
> As for rx-frags, just seemed useful to know how many frags
> were received. My understanding is that this is like receiving
> 1/2 of a packet at a time...so if we wanted to know how many
> real packets the NIC received, we'd need to take frags v/s non-frags
> into account. The current logic that counts 'all-packets' for
> the rx path is counting individual fragments, I think.
>
> At least for beacons, as long as they are always passed up
> the stack, I can count them in the mac80211 layer instead if
> you prefer.
When you only need the packet type based counters for debugging stuff,
why not just create a monitor mode interface and count in user space?
I think that would make more sense, since these counters are irrelevant
for most users, and avoiding unnecessary work in the rx path is useful
for performance reasons.
- Felix
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-06 16:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-03 16:18 [ath9k-devel] [PATCH 2/2] ath9k: Add more recv stats greearb at candelatech.com
2012-04-03 16:18 ` greearb
2012-04-04 12:01 ` [ath9k-devel] " Felix Fietkau
2012-04-04 12:01 ` Felix Fietkau
2012-04-04 15:13 ` [ath9k-devel] " Ben Greear
2012-04-04 15:13 ` Ben Greear
2012-04-06 16:51 ` Felix Fietkau [this message]
2012-04-06 16:51 ` Felix Fietkau
2012-04-06 16:58 ` [ath9k-devel] " Ben Greear
2012-04-06 16:58 ` Ben Greear
2012-04-06 22:30 ` [ath9k-devel] " Adrian Chadd
2012-04-06 22:30 ` Adrian Chadd
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
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4F7F1F13.8060003@openwrt.org \
--to=nbd@openwrt.org \
--cc=ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.