Re: [Cake] CAKE upstreaming - testers wanted, ACK filtering rescuers needed

[Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant <kevin@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1180 bytes --]



> On 26 Apr 2018, at 08:26, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Genuine question:  I have a superpacket circa 64K, this is a lump of data in a tcp flow.  I have another small VOIP packet, it’s latency sensitive.  If I split the super packet into individual 1.5K packets as they would be on the wire, I can insert my VOIP packet at suitable place in time such that jitter targets are not exceeded.  If I don’t split the super packet, surely I have to wait till the end of the superpacket’s queue (for want of a better word) and possibly exceed my latency target.  That looks to me like ‘GSO/TSO’ is potentially bad for interflow latencies.
> 
>> What don’t I understand here?
> 
> You have it exactly right.  For some reason, Eric is failing to consider the general case of flow-isolating queues at low link rates, and only considering high-rate FIFOs.

Thanks.  Well that’s a relief - Got something right!  The day can only go downhill from here :-)

Have to say, Sebastian’s analogy "turning 64K "oil-tankers" into a fleet of speedboats “ really made me smile.  Of course the cost is CPU, fortunately no risk of oil spillage :-)

[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]