On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 16:47 +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote: > On 2011-08-31 2:15 PM, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-08-28 at 21:11 +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote: > >> Unfortunately failed BAR tx attempts happen more frequently than I > >> expected, and the resulting aggregation teardowns cause performance > >> issues, as the aggregation session does not always get re-established > >> properly. > > > > I find this curious. How can tons of traffic go through, but BAR frames > > fail? These are unicast and should be retried a bunch... > I think it mostly happens when the client goes to powersave (triggered > by background scans, etc). Huh? That frame should be buffered properly. > >> Instead of tearing down the entire aggr session, we can simply store the > >> SSN of the last failed BAR tx attempt, wait for the first successful > >> tx status event, and then send another BAR with the same SSN. > > > > So what if it keeps failing? I think eventually we'd want to kill the > > session? > If it keeps failing, then the connection is probably so bad that it > doesn't matter if we kill the session or not. Hm, yeah, I guess it wouldn't really matter. johannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
