From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
bufferbloat-list <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: [Bloat] ADSL/ATM linklayer tc shaping regression fix commits for stable
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 13:26:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130820132629.51618797@redhat.com> (raw)
Hi Greg (and google search),
ADSL/ATM linklayer shaping were broken in kernel release from 3.8 to
3.10 by commit 56b765b79 ("htb: improved accuracy at high rates").
I can see that 3.9-stable is marked EOL, and 3.8-stable also seems
closed. I guess it is up to Greg, how far the commits described below
can be backported. Below is the commit needed for a 3.9 backport.
This was not the only regression introduced by the regression commit,
several fixes were required:
(Refactor/change commit for easy 3.9 backport step (in v3.10-rc1)):
commit 6906f4ed6f8 (htb: add HTB_DIRECT_QLEN attribute)
The following commit fixes are in 3.10-rc5:
commit 01cb71d2d47 (net_sched: restore "overhead xxx" handling)
commit 5343a7f8be1 (net_sched: htb: do not mix 1ns and 64ns time units)
The following commit fixes are in 3.10-rc6:
commit 40edeff6e1c (net_sched: qdisc_get_rtab() must check data[] array)
(this fix goes further back, but needed for linklayer atm, see below[1])
Refactor improvements (v3.11-rc1):
commit 130d3d68b52 (net_sched: psched_ratecfg_precompute() improvements)
The linklayer ATM/ADSL fix, reached 3.11-rc6:
commit 8a8e3d84b17 (net_sched: restore "linklayer atm" handling)
[1] Eric Dumazet also found a general "linklayer atm" regression
(dating way-back), which could cause rate-tables to get wrongly shared
between the same rates with-and-without linklayer atm settings.
Addressed/fixed in (3.10-rc6:):
- commit 40edeff6e1c (net_sched: qdisc_get_rtab() must check data[] array)
When configuring two completely equal rates, the kernel detects that
these two equal rates can share the same rate-table. But the kernel
didn't check if the rate-table data had been modified, which is done
in the linklayer atm case.
In practice, this often isn't a problem, as overhead parameter is
usually combined with the linklayer parameter.
The regression commit 56b765b79 ("htb: improved accuracy at high
rates"), is not all bad, it did provided a significantly improved rate
shaping accuracy. The old rate-table based system, which this commit
removed, would get inaccurate at rates above 100Mbit/s.
(ps. I'm the original author of http://www.adsl-optimizer.dk/ and
http://sourceforge.net/projects/adsl-optimizer/)
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Sr. Network Kernel Developer at Red Hat
Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
next reply other threads:[~2013-08-20 11:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-20 11:26 Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
2013-08-20 15:16 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-08-21 12:03 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2013-08-21 17:10 ` Dave Taht
2013-08-21 18:20 ` David Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130820132629.51618797@redhat.com \
--to=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox