| 051ea90c | 16-May-2020 |
Adrian Chadd <[email protected]> |
[ath_rate_sample] Limit the tx schedules for A-MPDU ; don't take short retries
into account and remove the requirement that the MCS rate is "higher" if we're
considering a new rate.
Ok, another fun
[ath_rate_sample] Limit the tx schedules for A-MPDU ; don't take short retries
into account and remove the requirement that the MCS rate is "higher" if we're
considering a new rate.
Ok, another fun one.
* In order for reliable non-software retried higher MCS rates, the TX schedules
(inconsistently!) use hard-coded lower rates at the end of the schedule.
Now, hard-coded is a problem because (a) it means that aggregate formation
is limited by the SLOWEST rate, so I never formed large AMDU frames for
3 stream rates, and (b) if the AP disables lower rates as base rates, it
complains about "unknown rix" every frame you transmit at that rate.
So, for now just disable the third and fourth schedule entry for AMPDUs.
Now I'm forming 32k and 64k aggregates for the higher density MCS rates
much more reliably.
It would be much nicer if the rate schedule stuff wasn't fixed but instead
I'd just populate ath_rc_series[] when I fetch the rates. This is all a
holdover of ye olde pre-11n stuff and I really just need to nuke it.
But for now, ye hack.
* The check for "is this MCS rate better" based on MCS itself is just garbage.
It meant things like going MCS0->7 would be fine, and say 0->8->16 is fine,
(as they're equivalent encoding but 1,2,3 spatial streams), BUT it meant
going something like MCS7->11 would fail even though it's likely that
MCS11 would just be better, both for EWMA/BER and throughput.
So for now just use the average tx time. The "right" way for this comparison
would be to compare PHY bitrates rather than MCS / rate indexes, but I'm not
yet there. The bit rates ARE available in the PHY index, but honestly
I have a lot of other cleaning up to here before I think about that.
* Don't include the RTS/CTS retry count (and thus time) into the average tx time
caluation. It just makes temporarily failures make the rate look bad by
QUITE A LOT, as RTS/CTS exchanges are (a) long, and (b) mostly irrelevant
to the actual rate being tried. If we keep hitting RTS/CTS failures then
there's something ELSE wrong on the channel, not our selected rate.
show more ...
|
| cce63444 | 15-May-2020 |
Adrian Chadd <[email protected]> |
[ath] [ath_rate] Extend ath_rate_sample to better handle 11n rates and aggregates.
My initial rate control code was .. suboptimal. I wanted to at least get MCS
rates sent, but it didn't do anywhere
[ath] [ath_rate] Extend ath_rate_sample to better handle 11n rates and aggregates.
My initial rate control code was .. suboptimal. I wanted to at least get MCS
rates sent, but it didn't do anywhere near enough to handle low signal level links
or remotely keep accurate statistics.
So, 8 years later, here's what I should've done back then.
* Firstly, I wasn't at all tracking packet sizes other than the two buckets
(250 and 1600 bytes.) So, extend it to include 4096, 8192, 16384, 32768 and
65536. I may go add 2048 at some point if I find it's useful.
This is important for a few reasons. First, when forming A-MPDU or AMSDU
aggregates the frame sizes are larger, and thus the TX time calculation
is woefully, increasingly wrong. Secondly, the behaviour of 802.11 channels
isn't some fixed thing, both due to channel conditions and radios themselves.
Notably, there was some observations done a few years ago on 11n chipsets
which noticed longer aggregates showed an increase in failed A-MPDU sub-frame
reception as you got further along in the transmit time. It could be due to
a variety of things - transmitter linearity, channel conditions changing,
frequency/phase drift, etc - but the observation was to potentially form
shorter aggregates to improve BER.
* .. and then modify the ath TX path to report the length of the aggregate sent,
so as the statistics kept would line up with the correct bucket.
* Then on the rate control look-up side - i was also only using the first frame
length for an A-MPDU rate control lookup which isn't good enough here.
So, add a new method that walks the TID software queue for that node to
find out what the likely length of data available is. It isn't ALL of the
data in the queue because we'll only ever send enough data to fit inside the
block-ack window, so limit how many bytes we return to roughly what ath_tx_form_aggr()
would do.
* .. and cache that in the first ath_buf in the aggregate so it and the eventual
AMPDU length can be returned to the rate control code.
* THEN, modify the rate control code to look at them both when deciding which bucket
to attribute the sent frame on. I'm erring on the side of caution and using the
size bucket that the lookup is based on.
Ok, so now the rate lookups and statistics are "more correct". However, MCS rates
are not the same as 11abg rates in that they're not a monotonically incrementing
set of faster rates and you can't assume that just because a given MCS rate fails,
the next higher one wouldn't work better or be a lower average tx time.
So, I had to do a bunch of surgery to the best rate and sample rate math.
This is the bit that's a WIP.
* First, simplify the statistics updates (update_stats()) to do a single pass on
all rates.
* Next, make sure that each rate average tx time is updated based on /its/ failure/success.
Eg if you sent a frame with { MCS15, MCS12, MCS8 } and MCS8 succeeded, MCS15 and MCS
12 would have their average tx time updated for /their/ part of the transmission,
not the whole transmission.
* Next, EWMA wasn't being fully calculated based on the /failures/ in each of the
rate attempts. So, if MCS15, MCS12 failed above but MCS8 didn't, then ensure
that the statistics noted that /all/ subframes failed at those rates, rather than
the eventual set of transmitted/sent frames. This ensures the EWMA /and/ average
TX time are updated correctly.
* When picking a sample rate and initial rate, probe rates aroud the current MCS
but limit it to MCS0..7 /for all spatial streams/, rather than doing crazy things
like hitting MCS7 and then probing MCS8 - MCS8 is basically MCS0 but two spatial
streams. It's a /lot/ slower than MCS7. Also, the reverse is true - if we're at
MCS8 then don't probe MCS7 as part of it, it's not likely to succeed.
* Fix bugs in pick_best_rate() where I was /immediately/ choosing the highest MCS
rate if there weren't any frames yet transmitted. I was defaulting to 25% EWMA and
.. then each comparison would accept the higher rate. Just skip those; sampling
will fill in the details.
So, this seems to work a lot better. It's not perfect; I'm still seeing a lot of
instability around higher MCS rates because there are bursts of loss/retransmissions
that aren't /too/ bad. But i'll keep iterating over this and tidying up my hacks.
Ok, so why this still something I'm poking at? rather than porting minstrel_ht?
ath_rate_sample tries to minimise airtime, not maximise throughput. I have
extended it with an EWMA based on sub-frame success/failures - high MCS rates
that have partially successful receptions still show super short average frame
times, but a /lot/ of retransmits have to happen for that to work.
So for MCS rates I also track this EWMA and ensure that the rates I'm choosing
don't have super crappy packet failures. I don't mind not getting lower
peak throughput versus minstrel_ht; instead I want to see if I can make "minimise
airtime" work well.
Tested:
* AR9380, STA mode
* AR9344, STA mode
* AR9580, STA/AP mode
show more ...
|