From: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>
To: "Simon Barber" <simon@devicescape.com>
Cc: "Jiri Benc" <jbenc@suse.cz>,
linville@tuxdriver.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] d80211: add ieee80211_stop_queues()
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 22:04:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200608232204.54396.mb@bu3sch.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <C86180A8C204554D8A3323D8F6B0A29F0165B5D2@dhost002-46.dex002.intermedia.net>
On Wednesday 23 August 2006 21:54, Simon Barber wrote:
> I'd agree the memory benefit is not worth the work and complexity. The
> additional benefit is tighter queue control - reducing the latency
> between the software qdisc (and whatever scheduling/rate controlling/etc
> work they are doing) and the frames coming out of the hardware. A 100
> frame DMA queue can be 1.2 seconds of transmit time, or it can be 30ms
> of transmit time depending on frame size and transmission rate. This
> disparity will only get larger as rates go up with 11n.
>
> A further benefit in reducing this latency - is to keep the latency
> between the software rate control algorithm (which sees frames before
> they hit the DMA queue) and the hardware tx down. This allows the
> software rate control to be more responsive.
Hm, I don't really see how a larger DMA ring adds latency.
A DMA ring is endless. From the device and driver point
of view it only goes forward. If we reach the physical end
while going forward, we simply start at the beginning again.
Both, device and driver maintain very simple pointers into the
ring that are simply incremented.
TX notification latency is only controlled by a flag in the
descriptor control. We currently request an IRQ for each frame,
so latency is as low as possible here.
Maybe I don't understand what you are trying to explain, but I
don't see a benefit other than lower memory usage by reducing
DMA ring length.
--
Greetings Michael.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-08-23 20:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-08-23 11:44 [PATCH] d80211: add ieee80211_stop_queues() Michael Buesch
2006-08-23 19:30 ` Simon Barber
2006-08-23 19:45 ` Michael Buesch
2006-08-23 19:54 ` Simon Barber
2006-08-23 20:04 ` Michael Buesch [this message]
2006-08-23 20:10 ` Simon Barber
2006-08-23 20:20 ` Michael Buesch
2006-08-23 20:32 ` Simon Barber
2006-08-23 20:57 ` Michael Buesch
2006-08-23 21:12 ` Simon Barber
2006-08-23 22:07 ` Michael Buesch
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=200608232204.54396.mb@bu3sch.de \
--to=mb@bu3sch.de \
--cc=jbenc@suse.cz \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=simon@devicescape.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).