From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com>,
Amitkumar Karwar <akarwar@marvell.com>,
Bing Zhao <bzhao@marvell.com>,
Sam Leffler <sleffler@chromium.org>,
Paul Stewart <pstew@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: improve latency and throughput while software scanning
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 16:46:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1359647168.8415.83.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130123113244.GA2941@redhat.com> (sfid-20130123_123259_415260_578716DF)
On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 12:32 +0100, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> Patch vastly improve latency while scanning. Slight throughput
> improvements were observed as well. Is intended for improve performance
> of voice and video applications, when scan is periodically requested by
> user space (i.e. default NetworkManager behaviour).
>
> Patch remove latency requirement based on PM_QOS_NETWORK_LATENCY,
> this value is 2000 seconds by default (i.e. approximately 0.5 hour !?!).
>
> Also remove listen interval requirement, which based on beaconing and
> depending on BSS parameters. It can make we stay off-channel for a
> second or more.
>
> Instead try to offer the best latency that we could, i.e. be off-channel
> no longer than PASSIVE channel scan time: 125 ms. That mean we will
> scan two ACTIVE channels and go back to on-channel, and one PASSIVE
> channel, and go back to on-channel.
>
> Patch also decrease PASSIVE channel scan time to about 110 ms.
>
> As drawback patch increase overall scan time. On my tests, when scanning
> both 2GHz and 5GHz bands, scanning time increase from 5 seconds up to 10
> seconds. Since that increase happen only when we are associated, I think
> it can be acceptable. If eventually better scan time is needed for
> situations when we lose signal and quickly need to decide to which AP
> roam, additional scan flag or parameter can be introduced.
>
> I tested patch by doing:
>
> while true; do iw dev wlan0 scan; sleep 3; done > /dev/null
>
> and
>
> ping -i0.2 -c 1000 HOST
>
> on remote and local machine, results are as below:
>
> * Ping from local periodically scanning machine to AP:
> Unpatched: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.928/24.946/182.135/36.873 ms
> Patched: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.928/19.678/150.845/33.130 ms
>
> * Ping from remote machine to periodically scanning machine:
> Unpatched: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.637/120.683/709.139/164.337 ms
> Patched: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.807/26.893/201.435/40.284 ms
>
> Throughput measured by scp show following results.
>
> * Upload to periodically scanning machine:
> Unpatched: 3.9MB/s 03:15
> Patched: 4.3MB/s 02:58
>
> * Download from periodically scanning machine:
> Unpatched: 5.5MB/s 02:17
> Patched: 6.2MB/s 02:02
Applied.
johannes
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-31 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-23 11:32 [PATCH] mac80211: improve latency and throughput while software scanning Stanislaw Gruszka
2013-01-23 18:51 ` Dan Williams
2013-01-31 15:46 ` Johannes Berg [this message]
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=1359647168.8415.83.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net \
--to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=akarwar@marvell.com \
--cc=bzhao@marvell.com \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pstew@chromium.org \
--cc=seth.forshee@canonical.com \
--cc=sgruszka@redhat.com \
--cc=sleffler@chromium.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).