On 04/28/2020 01:39 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On 04/28/2020 12:37 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
From: Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
While running tcp upload + download tests with ~200
concurrent TCP streams, 1-2 processes, and 30 station
vdevs, I noticed that the __ieee80211_stop_queue was taking
around 20% of the CPU according to perf-top, which other locking
taking an additional ~15%.
I believe the issue is that the ath10k driver would unlock the
txqueue when a single frame could be transmitted, instead of
waiting for a low water mark.
So, this patch adds a low-water mark that is 1/4 of the total
tx buffers allowed.
This appears to resolve the performance problem that I saw.
Tested with recent wave-1 ath10k-ct firmware.
Signed-off-by: Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt.h | 1 +
drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt_tx.c | 8 ++++++--
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt.h b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt.h
index 31c4ddbf45cb..b5634781c0dc 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt.h
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt.h
@@ -1941,6 +1941,7 @@ struct ath10k_htt {
u8 target_version_major;
u8 target_version_minor;
+ bool needs_unlock;
struct completion target_version_received;
u8 max_num_amsdu;
u8 max_num_ampdu;
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt_tx.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt_tx.c
index 9b3c3b080e92..44795d9a7c0c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt_tx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/htt_tx.c
@@ -145,8 +145,10 @@ void ath10k_htt_tx_dec_pending(struct ath10k_htt *htt)
lockdep_assert_held(&htt->tx_lock);
htt->num_pending_tx--;
- if (htt->num_pending_tx == htt->max_num_pending_tx - 1)
+ if ((htt->num_pending_tx <= (htt->max_num_pending_tx / 4)) && htt->needs_unlock) {
Why /4? Seems a bit arbitrary?
Yes, arbitrary for sure. I figure restart filling the queue when 1/4
full so that it is unlikely to run dry. Possibly it should restart
sooner to keep it more full on average?
Theoretically, the "keep the queue at the lowest possible level that
keeps it from underflowing" is what BQL is supposed to do. The diff
below uses the dynamic adjustment bit (from dynamic_queue_limits.h) in
place of num_pending_tx. I've only compile tested it, and I'm a bit
skeptical that it will work right for this, but if anyone wants to give
it a shot, there it is.
BTW, while doing that, I noticed there's a similar arbitrary limit in
ath10k_mac_tx_push_pending() at max_num_pending_tx/2. So if you're going
to keep the arbitrary limit maybe use the same one? :)
Before my patch, the behaviour would be to try to keep it as full as
possible, as in restart the queues as soon as a single slot opens up
in the tx queue.
Yeah, that seems somewhat misguided as well, from a latency perspective,
at least. But I guess that's what we're fixing with AQL. What does the
firmware do with the frames queued within? Do they just go on a FIFO
queue altogether, or something smarter?
Sort of like a mini-mac80211 stack inside the firmware is used to
create ampdu/amsdu chains and schedule them with its own scheduler.
For optimal throughput with 200 users steaming video,
the ath10k driver should think that it has only a few active peers wanting
to send data at a time (and so firmware would think the same), and the driver should
be fed a large chunk of pkts for those peers. And then the next few peers.
That should let firmware send large ampdu/amsdu to each peer, increasing throughput
over all.
If you feed a few frames to each of the 200 peers, then even if firmware has 2000
tx buffers, that is only 10 frames per peer at best, leading to small ampdu/amsdu
and thus worse over-all throughput and utilization of airtime.
It would be nice to be able to set certain traffic flows to have the
throughput optimization and others to have the latency optimization.
For instance, high latency on a streaming download is a good trade-off
if it increases total throughput. The end device will have plenty of
buffers to handle the bursts of data.
And of course other traffic will benefit from lower latency.
Maybe some of the AI folks training their AI to categorize cat pictures could
instead start categorizing traffic flows and adjusting the stack realtime...
And now...back to the grind for me.
Thanks,
Ben
--
Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
