From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ot0-x232.google.com (mail-ot0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12C823B2A4 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 02:21:47 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-ot0-x232.google.com with SMTP id f9so192090796otd.1 for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 23:21:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=rbaZXTBlNv52LWcPcK5WiGu3oUK12xvCTRrQqii++xA=; b=cVq8zHZ+V/Dg9N0BUJyK0RZAL5W9xpO3eFWaTv21tv4CW0IHeqXBBARbBLlRbk5sky vkKpDsA9w454/rK3Cedn2DN+Aa3nPnPZIE92MM7+YImms/Td9CHzyJ5PQgvN4pM8dDdJ 7lzZ9SC8We9z4L4ssA3SBJ7/5rSxC7PIZGK3T+lCY3EuW+0WKCif97c41gbenKB1qmRT LiekAl3LhXoe6ZzHVeP3+G3U6P0lcm8TuxXes8zqrA2SLeToKrT2Q8shDdaOzIXf2jvm D3qqDKC2jCOhNqAE00b5VJ5FWW7byb4dOlulOB2i2bK0F9leLbixMsTYo9djncDuHHSO 6P+A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=rbaZXTBlNv52LWcPcK5WiGu3oUK12xvCTRrQqii++xA=; b=uTYxdj1DaVhitCdedcKIs6ED66VjFm+SKZ+gw4fczOavGZsP64xPIs33HwfQRnkp17 OJPyazDSo/h20LiAy1jHTBLoRgZTtIIjmuHshYkklnFHFFgGt0JlyfokVHu/0/MEBVeS E8tjBXc6vlN7HsVsz2rDfCxU9+cJFD6EWrc04qqHkl1HGX4wcc6IjuETw1puW4iTEpmW yz+CeAdsh3RiJijJkOjeuquhMToPpGDQ5jBq3+F+wfe3G/SYNhStuZz02CvVatQD1E+h GJ/Cmm13E96wI0Aal7fX4gZATfVe/ptbQ3NJAI99nQnyUlh3QMXgeuiVFTSbNQkMIkcR EMbw== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXJ3nhIVNbTs23lkWTxpPcNZmn5rw8rEXb8/OxYQvasR+WzInhM8IpS12scmnqdo70lkblTUGW7pbqa73A== X-Received: by 10.157.4.1 with SMTP id 1mr2889131otc.205.1485501707395; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 23:21:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.157.1.21 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 23:21:47 -0800 (PST) From: Hans-Kristian Bakke Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 08:21:47 +0100 Message-ID: To: bloat Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113b136c9529a005470e510f Subject: [Bloat] Recommendations for fq_codel and tso/gso in 2017 X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 07:21:48 -0000 --001a113b136c9529a005470e510f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi After having had some issues with inconcistent tso/gso configuration causing performance issues for sch_fq with pacing in one of my systems, I wonder if is it still recommended to disable gso/tso for interfaces used with fq_codel qdiscs and shaping using HTB etc. If there is a trade off, at which bandwith does it generally make more sense to enable tso/gso than to have it disabled when doing HTB shaped fq_codel qdiscs? Regards, Hans-Kristian --001a113b136c9529a005470e510f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi

After having had some issues with inconcistent tso/gso = configuration causing performance issues for sch_fq with pacing in one of m= y systems, I wonder if is it still recommended to disable gso/tso for inter= faces used with fq_codel qdiscs and shaping using HTB etc.=C2=A0

=
If th= ere is a trade off, at which bandwith does it generally make more sense to = enable tso/gso than to have it disabled when doing HTB shaped fq_codel qdis= cs?

Regards,
Hans-Kristian
--001a113b136c9529a005470e510f--