On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 7:13 AM, John W. Linville <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 01:50:48PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:28 AM, Jim Gettys <jg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > such as wireless, or even possibly modern broadband with >> > PowerBoost, classic RED or similar algorithms that do not take the >> > buffer drain rate cannot possibly hack it properly. >> >> Understood, just curious if anyone has tried a Minstrel approach. > > FWIW, eBDP and the related algorithms from Tianji Li's paper are > philosophically similar to minstrel. Oh look at that, awesome!!! > They depend on measuring recent > conditions and modifying the current queue length accordingly. > > http://www.hamilton.ie/tianji_li/buffersizing.pdf > > The hack I added in debloat-testing is based on my understanding > of eBDP. It timestamps the SKBs when they are handed to the driver > for Tx and then checks the timestamp when the SKB is orphaned. It is > a bit crude and is an abuse of the skb_orphan API. Neat! > Also while it > accounts for the 802.11e queues separately, it doesn't account for > 802.11n aggregation. I see.. > Still, it seems to improve latency w/o hugely > impacting throughput in at least some environments -- YMMV! Sweet dude. For aggregation it seems the way to go is to get some helpers as Andrew has suggested. Andrew, can you elaborate a little on that? If feasible, then maybe then we can add it to the TODO list page: http://wireless.kernel.org/en/developers/todo-list and when one of us gets to it, we get cranking on it. Luis -- 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
