Cake - FQ_codel the next generation
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
To: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: [Cake] Cake fix: diffserv4 priority quanta
Date: Mon, 4 May 2015 06:58:08 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7D56E9A0-E611-47D6-996D-798700F7D050@gmail.com> (raw)

My preferred cake fix is Death By Chocolate - and it’s been quite a while since I’ve had any.  But this will have to do for now.

While drafting a paper to go with the code, I had to go back and think about the rationale for quite a few things, and this revealed that the quanta used for the priority layer in diffserv4 mode were incorrect.  There are two sets of quanta here:

- The one used when the allocated bandwidth for the class has not been exceeded, which sets a priority balance.  The ratios here need to be at least sufficient to allow any higher-priority class to force any lower-priority class out of the higher class's allocation; in practice it’s only necessary to consider adjacent pairs for this purpose.

- The one used when the allocated bandwidth for the class *has* been exceeded, which sets a bandwidth balance.  The ratios here should correspond to the effective allocations when *all* classes are fully saturated; transitions between the bandwidth and priority balance states take care of any other case.  The effective saturated allocation is the class’s own allocation *minus* the allocation of the class above it.

The basic allocations of the four classes in diffserv4 are:

Background:  100%
Best Effort: 15/16
Video:        3/4
Voice:        1/4

The effective saturated allocations are therefore:

Background:   1/16
Best Effort:  3/16
Video:        1/2
Voice:        1/4

It is now obvious that the quantum ratio between Best Effort and Background needs to be at least 16:1 in the priority balance, and should be 3:1 in the bandwidth balance.  Ratios of 4:1 for the elevated-priority classes in priority balance are sufficient.

The quanta for the diffserv8 and precedence modes are already sane (although the bandwidth-balanced quantum for the highest class turns out low, but this doesn't matter in practice; exercise for the reader is to work out why).  It helped, there, that the bandwidth allocations proceed geometrically (7:8 ratio in each step up) and are thus easier to calculate intuitively.

I’ve just pushed a corresponding patch to the net-next derived repo.  I don’t have push access to the out-of-tree version.

 - Jonathan Morton


                 reply	other threads:[~2015-05-04  3:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

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/cake.lists.bufferbloat.net/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=7D56E9A0-E611-47D6-996D-798700F7D050@gmail.com \
    --to=chromatix99@gmail.com \
    --cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    /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