netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"M. Braun" <michael-dev@fami-braun.de>,
	"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] bridge: multicast to unicast
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 18:23:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <99c01ce6-d80c-790e-25e5-157be31aee9a@nbd.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw6+P8um7TxDCYgJ=SJfFzpskboR7njgudMb3NR4JZ34BA@mail.gmail.com>

On 2017-01-10 18:17, Dave Taht wrote:
> In the case of wifi I have 3 issues with this line of thought.
> 
> multicast in wifi has generally supposed to be unreliable. This makes
> it reliable. reliability comes at a cost -
> 
> multicast is typically set at a fixed low rate today. unicast is
> retried at different rates until it succeeds - for every station
> listening. If one station is already at the lowest rate, the total
> cost of the transmit increases, rather than decreases.
> 
> unicast gets block acks until it succeeds. Again, more delay.
> 
> I think there is something like 31 soft-retries in the ath9k driver....
If I remember correctly, hardware retries are counted here as well.

> what happens to diffserv markings here? for unicast CS1 goes into the
> BE queue, CS6, the VO queue. Do we go from one flat queue for all of
> multicast to punching it through one of the hardware queues based on
> the diffserv mark now with this patch?
> 
> I would like it if there was a way to preserve the unreliability
> (which multiple mesh protocols depend on), send stuff with QoSNoack,
> etc - or dynamically choose (based on the rates of the stations)
> between conventional multicast and unicast.
> 
> Or - better, IMHO, keep sending multicast as is but pick the best of
> the rates available to all the listening stations for it.
The advantage of the multicast-to-unicast conversion goes beyond simply
selecting a better rate - aggregation matters a lot as well, and that is
simply incompatible with normal multicast.

Some multicast streams use lots of small-ish packets, the airtime impact
of those is vastly reduced, even if the transmission has to be
duplicated for a few stations.

- Felix

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-10 17:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-02 19:32 [PATCH net-next] bridge: multicast to unicast Linus Lüssing
2017-01-03 11:58 ` Nikolay Aleksandrov via Bridge
2017-01-03 13:15 ` Felix Fietkau
2017-01-06 12:47 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-06 13:52   ` Felix Fietkau
2017-01-06 13:54     ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-06 13:54       ` Felix Fietkau
2017-01-07 10:32       ` M. Braun
2017-01-07 14:55         ` Linus Lüssing
2017-01-09  8:08           ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-09 11:44             ` M. Braun
2017-01-09 12:15               ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-09 15:25                 ` michael-dev
2017-01-09 15:47                   ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-09 21:23               ` Linus Lüssing
2017-01-09 21:30                 ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-01-10  4:18                   ` Linus Lüssing
2017-01-10 10:56                     ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-10 17:17                       ` Dave Taht
2017-01-10 17:23                         ` Felix Fietkau [this message]
2017-01-10 18:24                           ` Dave Taht
2017-01-10 21:27                       ` Felix Fietkau
2017-01-11 11:26                         ` IgorMitsyanko
2017-01-11 11:30                           ` Felix Fietkau
2017-01-11 12:15                             ` IgorMitsyanko
2017-01-11 12:21                               ` Felix Fietkau
2017-01-07 15:15   ` Linus Lüssing
2017-01-09  8:05     ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-09 12:42       ` Linus Lüssing
2017-01-09 12:44         ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-09 23:12           ` Linus Lüssing
2017-01-11  9:17             ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-07  3:13 ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-01-07 15:06   ` Linus Lüssing
2017-01-09  8:36   ` Jean-Pierre Tosoni

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=99c01ce6-d80c-790e-25e5-157be31aee9a@nbd.name \
    --to=nbd@nbd.name \
    --cc=bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dave.taht@gmail.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michael-dev@fami-braun.de \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).