netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: jhs@mojatatu.com
Cc: Tom Herbert <therbert@google.com>,
	davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/9] bql: Byte Queue Limits
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2011 15:18:44 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1312809524.4372.29.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1312808784.17202.39.camel@mojatatu> (sfid-20110808_150704_677066_57A7292F)

Thanks for the Cc Jamal.

On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 09:06 -0400, jamal wrote:

> The challenge is going to be with wireless where the underlying
> bandwidth changes (and therefore the optimal queue size varies
> more frequently). The problem with active queue management is
> getting the feedback loop to be more accurate and i think there
> will be challenges with wired devices.
> I notice that you dont have any wireless devices;
> but it would be nice for someone to check this out on wireless.
> CCing Johannes - maybe he has some insight.

Well, the wireless case is curious, and has a whole bunch of corner
cases, since it's not necessarily PtP, it can be PtMP!

But considering the most basic case of us being a client connecting to
an AP first: yes, the bandwidth will change dynamically, I don't know
what impact this has on BQL, Tom, maybe you can think about this a bit?

The second big challenge in wireless is the PtMP case: if we're acting
as an AP, then we typically have four queues for any number of remote
endpoints with varying bandwidth. I haven't found a good way to handle
this, we can't have hardware queues per station (most HW is simply not
capable of that many queues) but technically we would want to make the
queue limits depend on the peer...

Since I just returned from vacation I have tons of email to dig through
I'll have to keep this short for now, but I'm definitely interested.

johannes


  reply	other threads:[~2011-08-08 13:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-08-08  4:43 [RFC PATCH v2 0/9] bql: Byte Queue Limits Tom Herbert
2011-08-08 13:06 ` jamal
2011-08-08 13:18   ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2011-08-25 15:29     ` Tom Herbert
2011-08-25 20:23       ` jamal
2011-08-25 15:19   ` Tom Herbert
2011-08-08 15:40 ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-08-08 17:51   ` Tom Herbert
2011-08-08 17:55     ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-08-08 17:56       ` Tom Herbert
2011-08-08 18:01       ` Tom Herbert
2011-08-08 18:19         ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-08-09  7:41           ` David Miller
2011-08-09  8:06             ` Eric Dumazet
2011-08-09 14:54               ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-08-09 18:28                 ` Tom Herbert
2011-08-12 18:20 ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-08-13  0:33   ` Tom Herbert
2011-08-13  0:38     ` Stephen Hemminger

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=1312809524.4372.29.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net \
    --to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=jhs@mojatatu.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=therbert@google.com \
    /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).