From: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com>
To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Cc: erik.taraldsen@telenor.com,
Priyaranjan Jha <priyarjha@google.com>,
bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Bloat] BBR implementations, knobs to turn?
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 18:34:04 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADVnQy=ENdj8J+o9K4z4zODCGYDb+e110GpGs8N+Z=PcrkMr4Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201117160744.395f108e@carbon>
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 10:08 AM Jesper Dangaard Brouer
<brouer@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 10:05:24 +0000 <erik.taraldsen@telenor.com> wrote:
>
> > Thank you for the response Neal
>
> Yes. And it is impressive how many highly qualified people are on the
> bufferbloat list.
>
> > old_hw # uname -r
> > 5.3.0-64-generic
> > (Ubuntu 19.10 on xenon workstation, integrated network card, 1Gbit
> > GPON access. Used as proof of concept from the lab at work)
> >
> >
> > new_hw # uname -r
> > 4.18.0-193.19.1.el8_2.x86_64
> > (Centos 8.2 on xenon rack server, discrete 10Gbit network card,
> > 40Gbit server farm link (low utilization on link), intended as fully
> > supported and run service. Not possible to have newer kernel and
> > still get service agreement in my organization)
>
> Let me help out here. The CentOS/RHEL8 kernels have a huge amount of
> backports. I've attached a patch/diff of net/ipv4/tcp_bbr.c changes
> missing in RHEL8.
>
> It looks like these patches are missing in CentOS/RHEL8:
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/78dc70ebaa38aa3
> [2] https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/a87c83d5ee25cf7
>
> Could missing patch [1] result in the issue Erik is seeing?
> (It explicitly mentions improvements for WiFi...)
Thanks, Erik, for the detailed information. This is super-useful.
And thanks, Jesper, for the patch analysis. Yes, I agree that missing
patch [1] is likely the cause of the lower BBR throughout in the
"new_hw" case. Since the "new_hw" is running an older kernel that's
missing this important patch, it would be expected to have lower
throughput in a workload like this. It's unfortunate that it's not
possible to have a newer kernel on the newer hardware; it does seem in
this case that this would probably do the trick.
best,
neal
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-20 23:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-16 15:25 erik.taraldsen
2020-11-16 21:14 ` Neal Cardwell
2020-11-17 10:05 ` erik.taraldsen
2020-11-17 15:07 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-11-19 7:57 ` erik.taraldsen
2020-11-19 13:32 ` Luca Muscariello
2020-11-19 14:35 ` erik.taraldsen
2020-11-20 11:10 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-11-20 12:42 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2020-11-23 12:57 ` erik.taraldsen
2020-11-30 17:18 ` Aaron Wood
2020-11-20 23:34 ` Neal Cardwell [this message]
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='CADVnQy=ENdj8J+o9K4z4zODCGYDb+e110GpGs8N+Z=PcrkMr4Q@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=ncardwell@google.com \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=erik.taraldsen@telenor.com \
--cc=priyarjha@google.com \
/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