From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lb0-x229.google.com (mail-lb0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05B1721F52C; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 10:33:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f169.google.com with SMTP id l4so4071667lbv.0 for ; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 10:33:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=pEs5PzplLqIhxlsm3ccxLmxXuNQyvZaX69ftG10Kz2g=; b=Jyma6hIErW57clRACvcpCo5HZadZHOfPrxzHiFHHoiTenrX12CIyiyhKfA4tX29aFo K//78DlQWbJBk3lFCD4S4GsivlFylVHCI09orvVVnateEXImb6Wnei6X8fO/zhhNvmAA H805Dgr8Zw/I5OlUIykpvA/Q9cSWV1SK+U3vir8cLZkELXAOyiMOv1Pjh97tm3MW2Zd1 tTzZPT9SUTTBskHQeFtdYYk0AyQjNO1bHVGKfXEohgnTZnQaETf15kf5qBJVo+SbLhvr GiDz9mV8xn0ync0+47I5zgeUFHabefLvFFycXD+u2vdWSt/zMcntgOMgGWZFzv37cfzn 7NIQ== X-Received: by 10.112.14.33 with SMTP id m1mr17570570lbc.16.1409420029123; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 10:33:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bass.home.chromatix.fi (188-67-224-93.bb.dnainternet.fi. [188.67.224.93]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id py4sm5251083lbb.4.2014.08.30.10.33.47 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 30 Aug 2014 10:33:48 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: <87ppfijfjc.fsf@toke.dk> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2014 20:33:45 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4FF4917C-1B6D-4D5F-81B6-5FC177F12BFC@gmail.com> References: <87ppfijfjc.fsf@toke.dk> To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Toke_H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) Cc: cerowrt-devel , bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] Comcast upped service levels -> WNDR3800 can't cope... X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2014 17:33:52 -0000 On 30 Aug, 2014, at 4:03 pm, Toke H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen wrote: > Jonathan Morton writes: >=20 >> Looking at the code, HTB is considerably more complex than TBF in >> Linux, and not all of the added complexity is due to being classful >> (though a lot of it is). It seems that TBF has dire warnings all over >> it about having limited packet-rate capacity which depends on the >> value of HZ, while HTB has some sort of solution to that problem. >=20 > Last I checked, those warnings were out-dated. Everything is in > nanosecond resolution now, including TBF. I've been successfully using > TBF in my experiments at bandwidths up to 100Mbps (on Intel Core2 x86 > boxes, that is). Closer inspection of the kernel code does trace to the High Resolution = Timers, which is good. I wish they'd update the comments to go with = that sort of thing. I've managed to run some tests now, and my old PowerBook G4 can = certainly handle either HTB or TBF in the region of 200Mbps, at least = for simple tests over a LAN. The ancient Sun GEM chipset (integrated = into the PowerBook's northbridge, actually) doesn't seem willing to push = more than about 470Mbps outbound, even without filtering - but that = might be normal for a decidedly PCI/AGP-era machine. I'll need to = investigate more closely to see whether there's a CPU load difference = between HTB and TBF in practice. I have two other machines which are able to talk to each other at = ~980Mbps. They're both AMD based, and one of them is a "nettop" style = MiniITX system, based around the E-450 APU. The choice of NIC, and more = specifically the way it is attached to the system, seems to matter most = - these both use an RTL8111-family PCIe chipset. - Jonathan Morton