Had to think about this for a bit... > > Right. Which brings us back to the original point, why does the hw need > > to make the scheduling decision between agg and non-agg? > > There is no scheduling between aag and legacy queue in the sense of > qdisc . Right. So why are you saying we should have a separate qdisc for it? > The aggregation need to be taken from single stream as > explained before, I think we simply agree on that. Which brings me back to my original point: to provide fairness within that stream we shouldn't have separate qdiscs for agg/non-agg parts of the stream. > Iwlwifi has HW support for it that that's the whole story we just need > queueing support from the software buffering stopping and starting > queue and last but not least there is a classification just an > extension of the regular AC scheduling. The fairness between legacy > and agg queue must be provided by actually 'not scheduling' I don't understand what you mean by "not scheduling". AIUI from the specs, there is no scheduling between aggregation/non-aggregation queues, or "within an AC" as I would say it. Therefore, I think we should remove the extra software queues and split up the single-AC stream into the different hardware queues in the driver, to be reunited in the FIFOs. > If you don't want to experiment but provide QoS by spec the scheduling > is best to leave to HW. I don't contend that only the hw is able to make QoS scheduling decisions, as they depend on air access etc. after all. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
