Re: [RFC v2 2/4] mac80211: Add airtime accounting and scheduling to TXQs
From: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk>
Date: 2018-08-29 13:23:14
Johannes Berg [off-list ref] writes:
On Mon, 2018-07-09 at 18:37 +0200, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen wrote:quoted
=20@@ -427,6 +428,8 @@ struct sta_info *sta_info_alloc(struct ieee80211_sub=
_if_data *sdata,
quoted
sta->cparams.interval =3D MS2TIME(100); sta->cparams.ecn =3D true; =20=20 + sta->airtime.weight =3D 1;Perhaps it might be useful to start with a higher default (even something like 1<<8) as that would allow adjusting up/down single stations, without having to adjust all stations and listening to new additions to adjust them quickly etc? Theoretically this doesn't really matter, but from a practical POV it may be easier to leave them all at the default and just adjust the ones that need adjustment for some reason.
Hmm, the problem with a higher weight is that weight*quantum becomes the time each station is scheduled, so having a higher value means higher latency. This could be fixed by replacing the station weights with per-station quantums, but I felt that this was exposing an implementation detail in the API; if we ever change the enforcement mechanism to not be quantum-based (as may be necessary for MU-MIMO for instance), we'll have to convert values in the kernel. Whereas weights are a conceptual measure that is not tied to any particular implementation.
quoted
ieee80211_sta_register_airtimeDo we really need this? We already have at least TX status with airtime, for ieee80211_sta_tx_notify() and friends, and the station pointer in that context, so couldn't we piggy-back on this? At least WMM-AC already requires the driver to provide this.
For the drivers that get airtime as part of TX completion, sure; but as I understand it, at least ath10k gets airtime information in out of band status reports, so there would need to be a callback for that in any case... -Toke