AQL and the ath10k is *lovely*

[amteza]

@dtaht

Pretty huge throughput hit, though. Unless that's VT80? I'm not complaining! Given a choice between household members being able to game, videoconference, watch movies and surf the web with zero glitches, or the maximum throughput possible, I'll always choose the former. Ripping latency out usually ends up with finding ways to get more bandwidth back, just with different techniques like zero copy or fq, or stuff we haven't thunk of yet.

So let me explain about the speed hit, these tests were done with the same parameters, including the MS2TIME and poll both set to 8. However, I had an idea after reading your feedback about Apple fq_codel upload buffering (which can be seen clearly in the log with the list of flows). Usually, I work in a different room where I have my computer (macOS) connected to a small switch (ERX running OpenWrt) and it is connected to another NanoHD that connects using WDS to my main AP. As it follows:

macOS <--USB dongle/eth--> switch <--eth--> NanoHD <--4x4 MIMO WDS--> NanoHD <--eth--> RPi4 (irtt/netserver)

With this convo I'm not using the macOS wireless but NanoHD to NanoHD, I thought our latency problem was in the macOS wifi Codel this will remove it, and it seems it worked. But, the wireless connection between these two devices is not as good due to distance, so it changes (bandwidth hit explanation), for example now is

780.0 Mbit/s, 80 MHz, VHT-MCS 4, VHT-NSS 4, Short GI
650.0 Mbit/s, 80 MHz, VHT-MCS 7, VHT-NSS 2, Short GI

Can you point me to where I should put the printk() or dev_info() to ensure the poll value is correct in my image? I wasn't able to make it work.
And with this bombshell moving on to the other thread. I guess our work with AQL is done here as 22.03.0 works flawlessly according, at least, to my tests.