From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
To: ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
Subject: [ath9k-devel] [PATCH] ath9k: apply coverage class on slottime too
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 14:24:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <508FD505.4080404@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <508FCF5A.2080204@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
On 2012-10-30 2:00 PM, Mathias Kretschmer wrote:
> On 10/30/2012 01:43 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>> On 2012-10-30 1:07 PM, Simon Wunderlich wrote:
>>> From: Mathias Kretschmer <mathias.kretschmer@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
>>>
>>> According to 802.11-2007 17.3.8.6 (slot time), the slot time should
>>> be increased by 3 us * coverage class. The code only increased the
>>> ack timeout, which is fixed by this patch.
>>>
>>> We have noticed in our long shot scenario that we see less collisions
>>> with this patch.
>> At some point I had the slot time increase in the driver, but noticed a
>> massive throughput degradation on 10-20 km links. Leaving the slot time
>> alone and changing only the ACK timeout fixed this. What distances did
>> you test?
>
> about 11km. did you test UDP (unidirectional) or TCP (bidirectional) throughput ?
I always use TCP, because UDP tests are too unrealistic to estimate real
performance.
> The larger slot time will increase the channel access overhead which should impact
> unidirectional throughput.
>
> With bidirectional traffic, the larger slottime should help to minimize collisions
> on loaded links. Overall this seems to increase the net throughput for us,
> especially in higher access categories (smaller backoff windows).
When I ran the test, the throughput degradation was so big that the
links became almost useless. It was a long time ago, so maybe this was
caused by another bug that has been fixed since. I will run another test
with this patch in a current version...
- Felix
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
To: Mathias Kretschmer <mathias.kretschmer@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Cc: Simon Wunderlich <simon.wunderlich@s2003.tu-chemnitz.de>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath9k-devel@venema.h4ckr.net,
linville@tuxdriver.com, mcgrof@qca.qualcomm.com,
sven@narfation.org, Simon Wunderlich <siwu@hrz.tu-chemnitz.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath9k: apply coverage class on slottime too
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 14:24:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <508FD505.4080404@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <508FCF5A.2080204@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
On 2012-10-30 2:00 PM, Mathias Kretschmer wrote:
> On 10/30/2012 01:43 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>> On 2012-10-30 1:07 PM, Simon Wunderlich wrote:
>>> From: Mathias Kretschmer <mathias.kretschmer@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
>>>
>>> According to 802.11-2007 17.3.8.6 (slot time), the slot time should
>>> be increased by 3 us * coverage class. The code only increased the
>>> ack timeout, which is fixed by this patch.
>>>
>>> We have noticed in our long shot scenario that we see less collisions
>>> with this patch.
>> At some point I had the slot time increase in the driver, but noticed a
>> massive throughput degradation on 10-20 km links. Leaving the slot time
>> alone and changing only the ACK timeout fixed this. What distances did
>> you test?
>
> about 11km. did you test UDP (unidirectional) or TCP (bidirectional) throughput ?
I always use TCP, because UDP tests are too unrealistic to estimate real
performance.
> The larger slot time will increase the channel access overhead which should impact
> unidirectional throughput.
>
> With bidirectional traffic, the larger slottime should help to minimize collisions
> on loaded links. Overall this seems to increase the net throughput for us,
> especially in higher access categories (smaller backoff windows).
When I ran the test, the throughput degradation was so big that the
links became almost useless. It was a long time ago, so maybe this was
caused by another bug that has been fixed since. I will run another test
with this patch in a current version...
- Felix
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-30 13:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-30 12:07 [ath9k-devel] [PATCH] ath9k: apply coverage class on slottime too Simon Wunderlich
2012-10-30 12:07 ` Simon Wunderlich
2012-10-30 12:43 ` [ath9k-devel] " Felix Fietkau
2012-10-30 12:43 ` Felix Fietkau
2012-10-30 13:00 ` [ath9k-devel] " Mathias Kretschmer
2012-10-30 13:00 ` Mathias Kretschmer
2012-10-30 13:24 ` Felix Fietkau [this message]
2012-10-30 13:24 ` Felix Fietkau
2012-10-31 10:47 ` [ath9k-devel] " Mathias Kretschmer
2012-10-31 10:47 ` Mathias Kretschmer
2012-11-28 12:06 ` [ath9k-devel] " Simon Wunderlich
2012-11-28 12:06 ` Simon Wunderlich
2012-12-07 12:35 ` [ath9k-devel] " Mathias Kretschmer
2012-12-07 12:35 ` Mathias Kretschmer
2013-04-22 10:08 ` [ath9k-devel] " Simon Wunderlich
2013-04-22 10:08 ` Simon Wunderlich
2013-04-22 10:15 ` [ath9k-devel] " Felix Fietkau
2013-04-22 10:15 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-04-22 18:38 ` [ath9k-devel] " John W. Linville
2013-04-22 18:38 ` John W. Linville
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=508FD505.4080404@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.