From: "Tomas Winkler" <tomasw@gmail.com>
To: "Johannes Berg" <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: "David Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
linville@tuxdriver.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2] mac80211: assign needed_headroom/tailroom for netdevs
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 20:15:23 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1ba2fa240805051015t7dfd3bd2nf7bc2fc1ab9799ca@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1210000923.8245.26.camel@johannes.berg>
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
>
> > I've did some measurement of the TX path on an embedded system (2.6.23 kernel)
> > When bridging packets from an ethernet device to wireless there is
> > loss of 12% in the CPU utilization and equivalent throughput reduction
> > in data packets that are checked and expanded in
> > ieee80211_subif_start_xmit function.
>
> Yeah, I figured.
>
>
> > The expansion is just due to bigger size of the 80211 header size, yet
> > the whole packet is reallocated and copied. As we are reaching 11n
> > rates 200bps and up this starts to be visible.
> > When header was reserved to the proper side already in the ethernet
> > driver the overhead was gone. Yet this doesn't seems to be a correct
> > solution for bridging or forwarding.
> > For example Iwlwifi HW supports scattered packets this would allow
> > just reallocate the header, providing data portion is aligned.
>
> Right. Not all hardware supports this though,
I would set NETIF_F_SG OR FRAGLIS to features...? (What actually is
the difference?)
but even when it does I
> don't see what we can do unless we want to do all this inside mac80211
> which I'd rather not.
Like Sending mac80211 header OOB as xmit function argument? This will
probably affect all the wme code as well...
Not good.
> SKBs don't have a way to say "I need N bytes writable headroom but I can
> do s/g operation for the rest" which is what we'd need. If that was
> available, we could even work with clones, then we could pull away the
> ethernet header and build the 802.11/device headers in separate buffers,
> demoting the old 'skb head' buffer to a data buffer...
>
Isn't this a requirement that header fits into a continuous buffer ?
It's sounds strange to me that there is no solution for efficient
bridging... Can bridging code handle this if we have native interface?
Thanks
Tomas
> johannes
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-05 17:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-04 21:24 [RFC] mac80211: assign needed_headroom/tailroom for netdevs Johannes Berg
2008-05-04 21:31 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-04 21:32 ` [RFC v2] " Johannes Berg
2008-05-05 0:30 ` David Miller
2008-05-05 7:22 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-05 14:27 ` Tomas Winkler
2008-05-05 15:22 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-05 17:15 ` Tomas Winkler [this message]
2008-05-05 17:57 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-05 18:58 ` David Miller
2008-05-05 19:05 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-05 19:50 ` David Miller
2008-05-05 19:57 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-05 20:02 ` David Miller
2008-05-05 20:10 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-05 20:44 ` David Miller
2008-05-05 20:57 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-05 21:01 ` David Miller
2008-05-05 22:37 ` David Miller
2008-05-05 22:44 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-05 23:14 ` David Miller
2008-05-05 23:23 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-05 23:39 ` David Miller
2008-05-06 0:01 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-06 0:08 ` David Miller
2008-05-06 11:13 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-06 1:32 ` Herbert Xu
2008-05-13 5:01 ` David Miller
2008-05-05 23:03 ` David Miller
2008-05-05 23:17 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-05 23:24 ` David Miller
2008-05-05 23:30 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-05 23:36 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-05 23:40 ` David Miller
2008-05-13 3:52 ` David Miller
2008-05-13 9:01 ` Johannes Berg
2008-05-13 9:45 ` David Miller
2008-05-13 10:07 ` Johannes Berg
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=1ba2fa240805051015t7dfd3bd2nf7bc2fc1ab9799ca@mail.gmail.com \
--to=tomasw@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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