From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 175F53B29E for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2025 05:11:56 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.de; s=s31663417; t=1739182314; x=1739787114; i=moeller0@gmx.de; bh=gN+P2wrMHXd4VLOmQIkYBDkUUSZ7qhf8TPdzO6bcN0I=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From: In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id: References:To:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from: message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject:to; b=ADTK8dzfBcxe1SuQ+Tb04E8uE/n79ouFCmiV7jbtOUb2ZW9FH6jeUAJfw5kR1gze TNepf9W1DV5rg8F7zLTWzMuBst7E2aLmobvRDeS8YywzWgpdwZ6c5VR550wwvSzKR WVDimH3Xgf4fFkeH1kdfOwCGIAh1ZMo6jJyEWccW36TctS21CigThoZqq8LynavJG +zV/Y7Vywh7f1gY/AdVP6tHkNVDMpqTww6UTcmpPndoMwutk4NhfCql8Km+hcdPo9 xMO70f4OQdGq4T7+j1RuE1/c9gpIDuNqNFKqQJOv6psU8zucW3xepqmZGxhe9jBw0 tmwMclBfPJyD84dt9w== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Received: from smtpclient.apple ([134.76.241.253]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx105 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MmlXK-1t0zCW1gvu-00fGp9; Mon, 10 Feb 2025 11:11:54 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3776.700.51.11.1\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: <87bjvarvtd.fsf@toke.dk> Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 11:11:43 +0100 Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <564C0719-2569-4A8A-981D-35F9473F8AF2@gmx.de> References: <87bjvarvtd.fsf@toke.dk> To: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3776.700.51.11.1) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:skF7/gAeaMuEYNUkG4pj/fw+Lrw5qqoUd2z4I34K8opvE2TpvBa SCwlH4LNJ739uHKUa0QY9EUoxvgc28F0r3jVPbQdmsc05dNRclqUFk19nwmZqLZSzrFRPGe FGYvPcQhyw+0FMqrAMxkedywWirUHPQZUorxy/Uqu3Bos7XtQp4oZRNrhlPs8BYCMUjmX2/ aiCNWFfdBsiEhUF/zc0aw== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:gl5LX37w664=;suIKmaOMdHx/onqb/fLmSTbGT9k 2PLr2bLZu/K1FdE4ql096AHxdCOy3x9Wj3a0ILYpPqqxpXzSLDreXX4KKHdXqJLzVxleDt3/O ZuCQ17zho1Q65/khRzDtBOSyRDqJjgQ50dZON/TMLFzqpirWHaKRHFVxRipLvSMRITqH2Quxp KY/vayvHjWwKwRRznrVu6UqB/3KB0zmv11puTPM+O3+v+EI3A2SnyXgPUf4DI8xDAxT29IpXQ wxjubEZajZXOWKwtMWZDNSopI7ZQLJK0z8uOi8ye1mPsM87t84ZtW1esR/3sU/XdnOibtU7nh zt16hqujmjKTDYbWQsmMg5npsrHDmo0ggmycGrUesWaauJsJfNC2jKwUpZXZCK8Z51Up87Uup B0CbjyVhX8GMbantM0A2VIi71rW0PenZpZxj+WyMQVnMfNI2K/8WZl6UQSoWemFzWio3PVdOi j9mhrhQTNFAUVs7aWlrDGj5s2OCko0PsBlRyh0SUHE7gjKKslC+SfAC77uddPHPZFURf3SvM2 pnrLmD9t2GnwpekgQ2QGLbIEgmTFJtdkZSsHkZ+Hrvx5QyM53RmEur5q8XmBuypvJxWOZ2T15 ZK82AdkEhsgK3xNEP5cQafQrrpXbri8CQTLzCRL2gBOxNokShLbgneCeZ3WWeR3Ltwcjdqjy1 zVFzhfYWf3tWzfVfysDScl6+f/9/3vWKgQOag5e+ybnRyWs/J/u1h1Xfjg1JTd/crimMgZh/F tt+fdrg895406yUsQqJB1tOV9sNss0vsd74q9LYWLP+caUztEaX2481Y7MWRjDAMozVriB3LR d6bsxYC09p0+C5iavBMtEnsKJePvdohndKxfESUYqCqWcIUWR/CfyNHhi+ZTPITjA8jKUEiGB SvNC4+4ke/3qaIRPLC7EEJRm1hAFiEqg8SZ1SpHY+N3Q+p21awt2oSgCnqdUgX7/5/BoHWlOV mMiP/m0xV2qygQj/EIFkYD0bDWhUff85b+nu7ipWQLPnWcAVGZjKqMfNOB96B5J+ghv/d/yzB 6U9zTvgZ4k6b7lnyVZR7x/3JdIMjEI38HGNmo8zg1mSf/uTcXN3bGBztunAqpJJcUC2e1T1JO OQxd1t1/MTlp9A8SugS5eXV9fOKqZu4L80xVT8AbjnH0ocARujEtjfHcKc4+pFqFvDqVgM3oY PlWKTSnVVnLEdOiOU39nJV+J7XoIss4o6TLqry8Lj1SwORRg2MSUqHMnQu3IrvGRLisntyr2a CPEEpvjBCNFZRnFtWmKyGOZOFJbgLa2znDnuCVW/QCdZ0L3Dya/RdLlCJg1LkXvWlCxzESbdA LlOZlhkO1e3Vix9XUMMRl5C2Tb1YkqWQVwct+2oUT7tEhOVQombcM/+iStCp8d0Yz5CxhfNTR KGyAxSPsrBCARjrLHXKFH60wimKGk2xxh8dOohrMH3aCXfVypasDNAoGIlsi78y4xqkzs9DTH NwqlArm4uVyEwVlww4gNia1lLy/A= Subject: Re: [Cake] [NetDev-People] 0x19: Talk, mq-cake: Scaling software rate limiting across CPU cores X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Cake - FQ_codel the next generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 10:11:57 -0000 That sounds most excellent... This also means that now we need cheap router hardware with > 2 NIC = queues and > 2 CPUs ;) (with ingress and egress shaping the current = state is that 2 CPUs can be utilised). I wonder, does this work for IFBs = as well or only for real hardware NIC queues? Regards Sebastian > On 10. Feb 2025, at 10:30, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen via Cake = wrote: >=20 > FYI :) >=20 >=20 > From: Jamal Hadi Salim via people > Subject: [NetDev-People] 0x19: Talk, mq-cake: Scaling software rate = limiting across CPU cores > Date: 9. February 2025 at 14:37:41 CET > To: people > Cc: Kimberley Jeffries , Lael Santos = , = program-committee@netdevconf.info, Bruno Banelli = , j.koeppeler@tu-berlin.de, = stefan.schmid@tu-berlin.de, Jamal Hadi Salim >=20 >=20 > Qdiscs rely on global lock to sync state across CPUs and therefore > dont scale in presence of many cores (or in presence of very high > bandwidth). > Jonas K=C3=B6ppeler, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen, and Stefan = Schmid implemented > a multi-queue variant of sch_cake that can scale its rate limiting > across hardware queues (and thus CPU cores) by sharing a bit of state > on top of the mq qdisc. >=20 > In this talk, they will present the implementation, performance > evaluation, as well as discuss their proposal for an API that will > make this work upstreamable, and applicable to other qdiscs as well. >=20 > Details: https://netdevconf.info/0x19/16 >=20 > cheers, > jamal > _______________________________________________ > people mailing list -- people@netdevconf.info > To unsubscribe send an email to people-leave@netdevconf.info >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Cake mailing list > Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake