From: Antonio Quartulli <ordex@autistici.org>
To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
<b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org>
Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCHv3] batman-adv: postpone OGM preparation to sending time
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 08:48:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130102074813.GB27589@ritirata.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201212261808.51135.lindner_marek@yahoo.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4728 bytes --]
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 06:08:50 +0800, Marek Lindner wrote:
> On Saturday, December 15, 2012 19:14:42 Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> > OGMs are currently prepared 1 originator interval in advance
> > then the time they are used to be sent.
> > This means that once in the air they carry old information (like TT
> > announcements and possibly other flags). To fix this, postpone the OGM
> > creation to the same time of sending, in this way the OGM is first created
> > and then immediately sent.
>
> How about:
> OGMs are currently assembled and enqueued one originator interval before they
> are sent. This means they might carry information which was outdated while the
> OGM waited in the outgoing packet queue (like TT announcements and possibly
> other flags).
> The OGM assembly has to be postponed to the latest possible moment before
> sending in order to minimize the gap between gathering the data and flooding
> it to the network.
Sounds much better. Thanks!
>
>
> > -/* when do we schedule our own ogm to be sent */
> > +/**
> > + * batadv_iv_ogm_emit_wait_time - compute the OGM preparation waiting time
> > + * @bat_priv: the bat priv with all the soft interface information
> > + *
> > + * Returns the amount of jiffies to wait before preparing and sending the
> > next + * own OGM
> > + */
>
> I'd say "Returns the number of jiffies [..]".
>
Yeah
>
> > @@ -468,6 +442,7 @@ static void batadv_iv_ogm_aggregate(struct
> > batadv_forw_packet *forw_packet_aggr, memcpy(skb_buff, packet_buff,
> > packet_len);
> > forw_packet_aggr->packet_len += packet_len;
> > forw_packet_aggr->num_packets++;
> > + forw_packet_aggr->own |= own_packet;
> >
> > /* save packet direct link flag status */
> > if (direct_link) {
>
> Using "|= own_packet" isn't strictly necessary because "forw_packet_aggr->own"
> isn't a bit field.
Well the point is that here own_packet could be false, but forw_packet_aggr->own
might already be true, so I didn't want to destroy the original value.
> Did you vigorously test this code ? Especially, multi-node with multiple
> interface setups are of interest. Also use different orig intervals to ensure
> it still works everywhere.
>
I will try more topologies and in particular different orig intervals as soon as
I have the possibility
> The thing is: Throughout the code you can find the implicite assumption of the
> first aggregated packet being an "own packet" (if forw_packet_aggr->own is
> set). Therefore, you have to be very careful changing that logic. One function
> you definitely overlooked is batadv_iv_ogm_send_to_if() but there might be
> others.
>
>
> > @@ -498,8 +473,7 @@ static void batadv_iv_ogm_queue_add(struct batadv_priv
> > *bat_priv,
> >
> > /* find position for the packet in the forward queue */
> > spin_lock_bh(&bat_priv->forw_bat_list_lock);
> > - /* own packets are not to be aggregated */
> > - if ((atomic_read(&bat_priv->aggregated_ogms)) && (!own_packet)) {
> > + if ((atomic_read(&bat_priv->aggregated_ogms))) {
> > hlist_for_each_entry(forw_packet_pos, tmp_node,
> > &bat_priv->forw_bat_list, list) {
> > if (batadv_iv_ogm_can_aggregate(batadv_ogm_packet,
>
> Now it gets interesting! Did you review the impact of
> batadv_iv_ogm_can_aggregate() before you bravely removed the exclusion of own
> packets ? That is quite a beast ...
well, the poor existing doc didn't point out all the possible threats :-P I'll
investigate more. Thanks :)
>
>
> > +/**
> > + * batadv_iv_ogm_send - prepare an send an own OGM
> > + * @work: kernel work struct
> > + *
> > + * Prepare the OGM and immediately enqueue it for sending
> > + */
>
> prepare and send an own OGM
> ^^^
>
well, technically it is enqueued, not sent..
>
> > +static void batadv_iv_ogm_send(struct work_struct *work)
>
> The naming is less than optimal. bat_iv_ogm.c now has:
> * batadv_iv_ogm_send
> * batadv_iv_ogm_emit
mh..ok, I will propose something better :)
>
>
> > --- a/types.h
> > +++ b/types.h
> > @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ struct batadv_hard_iface_bat_iv {
> > unsigned char *ogm_buff;
> > int ogm_buff_len;
> > atomic_t ogm_seqno;
> > + struct delayed_work work;
> > };
>
> Guess we need some kernel doc for this change too. Since types.h now is fully
> documented ...
>
only because you are commenting this patch after having merged your full-kernel-doc-patch :-D
Ok, I will fix it too.
Thank you very much for your precious feedback.
Greetings from down under!
Cheers,
--
Antonio Quartulli
..each of us alone is worth nothing..
Ernesto "Che" Guevara
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-02 7:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-15 11:14 [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCHv3] batman-adv: postpone OGM preparation to sending time Antonio Quartulli
2012-12-26 10:08 ` Marek Lindner
2013-01-02 7:48 ` Antonio Quartulli [this message]
2013-01-02 11:44 ` Marek Lindner
2013-01-03 9:54 ` Antonio Quartulli
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=20130102074813.GB27589@ritirata.org \
--to=ordex@autistici.org \
--cc=b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox