Return-path: Received: from nbd.name ([46.4.11.11]:39389 "EHLO nbd.name" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753142Ab3GBSFu (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jul 2013 14:05:50 -0400 Message-ID: <51D3167D.3070000@openwrt.org> (sfid-20130702_200553_552881_CD849E9C) Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2013 20:05:49 +0200 From: Felix Fietkau MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jean-Pierre Tosoni CC: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC v2] mac80211: Use libnl-configurable values for retry counts References: <1372351227-25575-1-git-send-email-jp.tosoni@acksys.fr> <51CF3EC9.3000707@openwrt.org> <000001ce7728$18b07de0$4a1179a0$@acksys.fr> <51D2DAB9.4050002@openwrt.org> <000101ce774b$3925e380$ab71aa80$@acksys.fr> In-Reply-To: <000101ce774b$3925e380$ab71aa80$@acksys.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2013-07-02 7:40 PM, Jean-Pierre Tosoni wrote: > Hi Felix, > > Sorry to use your time again... > >> But much more important than that is to not cause regressions for other >> people via aggressive packet dropping. > > Agreed, but see below. > >> If you put the code in minstrel (and minstrel_ht), it not only allows >> making a better tradeoff for retry handling, the code also doesn't have >> to be run for every single packet. You can run it during the rate >> control stats update. > > OK, I'll have a look at that part now. > >> >> The reduction of retry attempts definitely needs to be balanced >> properly. Retries with max_prob_rate can be more important than retries >> with max_tp_rate, but there needs to be a minimum for each of those. > > This leads to a question about regressions and backward compatibility: > > Since minstrel can compute as much as 28 retries for a frame, > And since the (standard) default value for "short_frame_max_tx_count" is 7, > > ... there is no way I can enforce the configured value while keeping > minstrel counts by default ! > The standard itself gives a very aggressive limit! Or am I mistaken about > the significance of this configuration parameter ? I think you're right about this. Specifically because the standard limit is much lower than what is being used now, we need to really make sure that it's applied in a way that it does not harm the normal use case in any visible way. - Felix