From: Daniele Palmas <dnlplm@gmail.com>
To: "Bjørn Mork" <bjorn@mork.no>,
"David Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
"Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Daniele Palmas <dnlplm@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: usb: qmi_wwan implement tx packets aggregation
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 15:25:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221019132503.6783-1-dnlplm@gmail.com> (raw)
Hello Bjørn and all,
this patchset implements and document tx qmap packets aggregation in qmi_wwan.
Low-cat Thread-x based modem are not capable of properly reaching the maximum
allowed throughput both in tx and rx during a bidirectional test if tx packets
aggregation is not enabled.
I verified this problem by using a MDM9207 Cat. 4 based modem (50Mbps/150Mbps
max throughput). What is actually happening is pictured at
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xuAuDBfBEIM3Cdg2zHYQJ5tdk-JkfQn7/view?usp=sharing
When rx and tx flows are tested singularly there's no issue in tx and minor
issues in rx (a few spikes). When there are concurrent tx and rx flows, tx
throughput has an huge drop. rx a minor one, but still present.
The same scenario with tx aggregation enabled is pictured at
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Kw8TVFLVgr31o841fRu4fuMX9DNZqJB5/view?usp=sharing
showing a regular graph.
This issue does not happen with high-cat modems (e.g. SDX20), or at least it
does not happen at the throughputs I'm able to test currently: maybe the same
could happen when moving close to the maximum rates supported by those modems.
Anyway, having the tx aggregation enabled should not hurt.
It is interesting to note that, for what I can understand, rmnet too does not
support tx aggregation.
I'm aware that rmnet should be the preferred way for qmap, but I think there's
still value in adding this feature to qmi_wwan qmap implementation since there
are in the field many users of that.
Moreover, having this in mainline could simplify backporting for those who are
using qmi_wwan qmap feature but are stuck with old kernel versions.
I'm also aware of the fact that sysfs files for configuration are not the
preferred way, but it would feel odd changing the way for configuring the driver
just for this feature, having it different from the previous knobs.
Thanks,
Daniele
Daniele Palmas (2):
net: usb: qmi_wwan: implement qmap uplink tx aggregation
Documentation: ABI: sysfs-class-net-qmi: document tx aggregation files
Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-net-qmi | 28 ++
drivers/net/usb/qmi_wwan.c | 242 +++++++++++++++++-
2 files changed, 266 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--
2.37.1
next reply other threads:[~2022-10-19 13:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-19 13:25 Daniele Palmas [this message]
2022-10-19 13:25 ` [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: usb: qmi_wwan: implement qmap uplink tx aggregation Daniele Palmas
2022-10-19 13:25 ` [PATCH net-next 2/2] Documentation: ABI: sysfs-class-net-qmi: document tx aggregation files Daniele Palmas
2022-10-19 15:04 ` [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: usb: qmi_wwan implement tx packets aggregation Bjørn Mork
2022-10-19 15:48 ` Greg KH
2022-10-20 0:55 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 18:04 ` Daniele Palmas
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=20221019132503.6783-1-dnlplm@gmail.com \
--to=dnlplm@gmail.com \
--cc=bjorn@mork.no \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.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).