From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-iw0-f171.google.com (mail-iw0-f171.google.com [209.85.214.171]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F0DD201A42 for ; Sun, 29 May 2011 10:24:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iwn8 with SMTP id 8so3784761iwn.16 for ; Sun, 29 May 2011 10:40:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=QeEAwMD8I5CCIB0l6IIy6NEa9UD2G5xwDxUV0WqH94s=; b=RqjGLUcMejNMiAEyL9zNSYm5U2eQpO2EiGEtJDCv8ntHiiEcv61ruoilQi84wigyFc YvnGiuMeFg/RyqWYyhy1DQrEN6w6dmZorqDuPbTDcYJA7xXDKf9C/6DPDFWs8yRIt2Se se3DS9xjewLCgdtL7PkP2O3TjeeUJ7cxoOgVY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=GMsT5qpBgqsnORdkkZ+24qVwG0ZiIS868sr610qFeikO7D1Htej8nMinXItKMyWbMX mshnbhMKIw9W6v2VNsBngXvpmy3f2ul6HxaklDbRMiwWyo7zUmIFY+XdaCrJ5Qf4ii7C 0B5IvkmVPTt13wKGLqsA8Vc0b2B8Ze4rjyRYM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.253.87 with SMTP id mz23mr4876772ibb.197.1306690817696; Sun, 29 May 2011 10:40:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.39.203 with HTTP; Sun, 29 May 2011 10:40:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1306689449.30021.16.camel@edumazet-laptop> References: <7ifwnxbjyn.fsf@lanthane.pps.jussieu.fr> <7i62otpks1.fsf@lanthane.pps.jussieu.fr> <1306686801.30021.14.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1306689449.30021.16.camel@edumazet-laptop> Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 11:40:17 -0600 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Eric Dumazet Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00032555dc3605248004a46daaa8 Cc: Gabor Juhos , bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] tiny monsters: multicast packets 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: Sun, 29 May 2011 17:24:27 -0000 --00032555dc3605248004a46daaa8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Eric Dumazet wrot= e: > Le dimanche 29 mai 2011 =E0 11:02 -0600, Dave Taht a =E9crit : > > > The kernel being used in capetown[1] is 2.6.37.6. - patched forward > > from 2.6.39 for the pfifo ecn bug, the ipv6 ecn bug, and several other > > bufferbloat related things like sfb... > > > > Hmm, maybe you could try "perf top" if available to make sure cpu time > is used in this driver, not in another layer ? > > > > perf-top does not appear to have been ported to openwrt, and as cool as it is, I do not know if the related performance counters exist for mips. it would be darn useful though. All I know at the moment is that sirq is at 99% at the given workload, according busybox's top. http://www.bufferbloat.net/attachments/download/33/routertest.png It is mildly early to point at the driver as being the issue - it could be the switch or something else entirely. Would iptables or qos rules show up in sirq? --=20 Dave T=E4ht SKYPE: davetaht US Tel: 1-239-829-5608 http://the-edge.blogspot.com --00032555dc3605248004a46daaa8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Eric D= umazet <eric= .dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
Le dimanche 29 mai 2011 =E0 11:02 -0600, Dave Taht a =E9crit :

> The kernel being used in capetown[1] is 2.6.37.6. - patched forward > from 2.6.39 for the pfifo ecn bug, the ipv6 ecn bug, and several other=
> bufferbloat related things like sfb...
>

Hmm, maybe you could try "perf top" if available to make su= re cpu time
is used in this driver, not in another layer ?




perf-top does not appear to have been ported to open= wrt, and as cool as it is, I do not know if the related performance counter= s exist for mips.

it would be darn useful though.

All I know = at the moment is that sirq is at 99% at the given workload,
according busybox's top.

http://www.bufferbloat.net/attachmen= ts/download/33/routertest.png

It is mildly early to point at the= driver as being the issue - it could be the switch or something else entir= ely. Would iptables or qos rules show up in sirq?


--
Dave T=E4ht
SKYPE: davetaht
US Tel: 1-23= 9-829-5608
ht= tp://the-edge.blogspot.com
--00032555dc3605248004a46daaa8--