From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E20364A for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2024 15:56:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724774218; cv=none; b=mciHbGVf29N2+58Pvmfj+8G6uTfi2QUkEsCgGclUH8TuRKDRF2jjV10qOjhDdWYpA90HhpKYtGvzvQIKlhYsos8cbNderUgF/aho7uRSNjcy4yzwsXzOm3vh6tUAemjGd3On1EfYMZNeyBi5B8NKfWqKNxu+KjksnFjozjGIQys= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724774218; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pgCHzt6Y0cMJ2Pevil3gY+QPZjwopUWKiYr0ptYka3k=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=Z+ZHG4fydhGxzerCsshqVRKMZe1aRYzZChlcTru3O/s0fc2rhO6b+ObxmqqakSUnCkey83Ap641TReLuiLeQePk2cYWz/kZCUkzyl8tkv+y7NDV7UL3r5EJKuCzrHHJKCfZoc8fqPnGp0evRQFdWBYgJQ8SakwSlf3AOY/fP9RI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=ZZ7u2f1e; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="ZZ7u2f1e" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender: Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=oMlpNk/3oYYu+0JQsrcKC7pkmJbIAfM6XBbjgv6XNrA=; t=1724774216; x=1725983816; b=ZZ7u2f1eSmsHmUkTk84R1gxhqp2pnFZypLgzVr0yuDSBGwN 7x7oRuxc9knSjv21yLmEwHcpXDVw/wf07R3py1Ftthp7EiNj8NfVBdP4JYQcZC/UqgGrbzodTHP7g dwTySibYsEd0ZVRU36jYVIsT1JO6sEv9lADo1y+7jN8+LWGpNru8zcnBRzoiUr3o3I+JTwhcdejK2 CTofh0/cV4nefTCZzsUbLaDngshwDsQvvYutJzZQlHlyfpZt02wSFw4TI33nFOtMcfYuT3nmWkVMu Qno0IZlf/fj3M8IF350tnoeMvYqooECmrHaY9UWi+Fbpar0+Get1d57tjeWnvEaQ==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1siyYv-000000050Zr-3f2X; Tue, 27 Aug 2024 17:56:54 +0200 Message-ID: <7ccb9c8ccb0dd16539ac064a35d6bf6b31d0bf0d.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: Per MLO link TX stats From: Johannes Berg To: Ben Greear , linux-wireless Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 17:56:53 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.52.4 (3.52.4-1.fc40) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Fri, 2024-07-12 at 10:52 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > Hello, >=20 > I've been trying to get better per MLO link stats. I see that the rx pat= h > stats are there, but in the tx path, I do not see anything other than 'de= flink' > getting updated. Yeah, nobody really cared too much about statistics yet. I know. Sorry. Not much time to work on it either now. > And, at least with iwlwifi, I cannot find any way to actually see what li= nk-id > was used to transmit a frame in the tx status callbacks (or anywhere else= I looked). You can probably derive that from the band for iwlwifi, since it only supports one active link on each 2.4 / 5 / 6 GHz if at all. And the band I guess you'd get from the LMAC ID or something. Should be in there somewhere... IOW, I think it's possible, but I'm also not entirely sure how we'd do it. > In the case where there is a single active link, then I can hack somethin= g together > that should be at least mostly right, but that won't fix any future radio= that can > do 2+ active links. >=20 > Any suggestions for best path forward on this? I really think we also need to do some work on the API/cfg80211 level, and have link station statistics in cfg80211 instead of full station, and then combine them to (older) userspace in cfg80211, i.e. if userspace doesn't request broken out per-link statistics. There's probably a bunch of work here, and I only have a vague idea of how it should be done...