From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-x235.google.com (mail-wm0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::235]) (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 909103B29E for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 05:01:58 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wm0-x235.google.com with SMTP id v186so13473062wmd.0 for ; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 02:01:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references :to; bh=ZUh8riWQCJsI5jYAFkbaUfTBz8lBpHZIRM4wSWuP0vs=; b=crSApfTgI4Ouy7rHj+6HJ3b3N91oKim9dNKnobSna5ShtH/esgydAp7BEEUbclLCNl mtNjNfB306ZQf1lAvSZIfMnSJpGUQXRV3ihhVEubHNFgDjbKTdFf0xgFfbX4YM98wiNJ Jw4UrOV77Qd5NutZg2gmSGso2/fBd12y5W38WpgIRpGf8bJ54U9fyepE4osqxEIhe4p5 rgnCh7Dhn0XajcuU1BvkewLYDqZFABIy45Nkx8iZy8cyieFjIxfyOXqe+HMUdk+DCh7C 7O7oeBCalPZszXKaV2N9KIlm6l6qNnfGVXFuMcmTPXUdlg53J2Mc9mdufPPbS7SgmAef QQRA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=ZUh8riWQCJsI5jYAFkbaUfTBz8lBpHZIRM4wSWuP0vs=; b=BwsJ1+unDBlEUJmStX2vh6eDKw0A9JBosnRHFVtfL7aTXAgwbj/cKofwpU5gSObdQE EwC1zrcg11BEnvgsg1Fr7lgzDMDEZ4Q8PQ1VRNqlAPpJQhsBJ147e9NtHw3GecUE3z9R Q1Tktf+uNJQOJ7HFn3qVnbbATCp2+d44e1cCMgiIRSNlyLadyxoqyz51CWI3e/vAJDWs 70ZCj1vqPGHRPxSevDkEwtuj4Utuc5f6aWeVuVgm8LTnyWg4WjXWTcdyfo14CdC9Jr/u XzegBuRglEKQw2Dd4ClwiKUl76N3JOg8R7ePe08e/3hI++P0JfBqO7Kxba6xHI37aHDa EJgQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nB9ijWrsBufmydBmOam+mtu9mOAtRtueKwdOlxQ25H4IHzoSxpLHqFqR4dScyl5Q== X-Received: by 10.28.57.131 with SMTP id g125mr2329685wma.33.1487066517283; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 02:01:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.72.0.34] (h-1169.lbcfree.net. [185.99.119.68]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 10sm2778544wmk.26.2017.02.14.02.01.56 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 14 Feb 2017 02:01:56 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_914571A8-0BF6-4DFA-A531-F3852E198324" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Pete Heist In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:02:11 +0100 Cc: Cake List Message-Id: <7DB7E26B-2BFE-4741-B0B0-F069CC33F75B@gmail.com> References: <459B9F17-317F-465E-8D2F-361CF47E5F32@gmail.com> <3D9E1A43-0182-4A1F-8262-6F587A79254E@gmail.com> <830143EE-20F2-42A5-A4FC-ECE7DF50C632@gmail.com> <652AA7A2-60C5-460F-AE60-CF4CB1D1D781@gmail.com> <5BE2A225-4B9C-4F0F-ACC5-C23CCC873DF5@gmail.com> <4B18C549-4CEF-4275-B9B3-CB8A046EB4EC@gmail.com> <856BB65A-569E-4633-B104-5E3BD15B649F@gmail.com> <70520D3D-D381-44DC-A789-BB1E24FBE3F4@gmx.de> <531AF998-D1B2-43A6-A55B-F0471C0164E1@gmail.com> <967D2491-5DB5-45CC-B4C5-E8FF48743504@gmail.com> <8305DE32-10AB-42C3-8D08-5FF3391914BF@gmail.com> <91B87669-0F79-4D03-BB37-8A25E9695ABE@gmail.com> To: Jonathan Morton X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Subject: Re: [Cake] Cake latency update 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: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:01:58 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_914571A8-0BF6-4DFA-A531-F3852E198324 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On Feb 12, 2017, at 6:15 PM, Pete Heist wrote: >=20 >> On Feb 12, 2017, at 5:41 PM, Jonathan Morton = wrote: >>=20 >>> On 12 Feb, 2017, at 16:12, Pete Heist wrote: >>>=20 >>> 2) Using a 1.25 GHz Mac Mini PPC G4 I have laying around. I = successfully ran fq_codel for ADSL on that box in the past, but at 5 / = 0.5 Mbps. Accurate Flent results running Cake at 80 Mbps? Timer issues? >>=20 >> That should be absolutely fine at 80Mbps. PowerPC Macs seem to have = good hi-res timers in my experience, and the Sun GEM is a relatively = good NIC. The main limitation is that it=E2=80=99s PCI rather than = PCIe, so it can=E2=80=99t reach the full GigE line rate, but it does go = well above 100Mbps. >>=20 >> Don=E2=80=99t worry about BQL, since you=E2=80=99re not relying on = NIC backpressure to control queuing. >=20 > Ok, good news, then that=E2=80=99s the way I=E2=80=99ll go! Thanks for = that, more results later... Replacing the MBP (sky2 Ethernet driver) with a PPC G4 with the Sun GEM = appears to have fixed the class of five-second-throughput-shifts that I = reported earlier. See the much smoother Cake results below. :) I=E2=80=99l= l be re-running all of my other tests again. It does raise a new question though. In the 10 Mbit and 20 Mbit Cake = tests, one of the TCP download flows gets a bit starved relative to the = average. I was seeing this earlier also before I moved to the PPC. I = don=E2=80=99t see this at 30Mbit and above. There is also a latency = variation in 75Mbit fq_codel, so I know that sometimes you can just say = =E2=80=9Cit=E2=80=99s Wi-Fi=E2=80=9D. I don=E2=80=99t have the time to = check this on Ethernet now, but maybe later. Cake: http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_10mbit/index.html = = (partial starvation for one tcp download flow) http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_20mbit/index.html = = (partial starvation for one tcp download flow) http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_30mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_40mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_50mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_60mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_70mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_75mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_80mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_85mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_90mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_100mbit/index.html = fq_codel: http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_10mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_20mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_30mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_40mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_50mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_60mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_70mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_75mbit/index.html = = (latency variation and something wrong in one udp flow) http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_80mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_85mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_90mbit/index.html = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_100mbit/index.html = Pete --Apple-Mail=_914571A8-0BF6-4DFA-A531-F3852E198324 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

On Feb 12, 2017, at 6:15 PM, = Pete Heist <peteheist@gmail.com> wrote:

On Feb = 12, 2017, at 5:41 PM, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> wrote:

On 12 Feb, 2017, at = 16:12, Pete Heist <peteheist@gmail.com> wrote:

2) Using a 1.25 GHz Mac Mini PPC G4 I have laying around. I = successfully ran fq_codel for ADSL on that box in the past, but at 5 / = 0.5 Mbps. Accurate Flent results running Cake at 80 Mbps? Timer = issues?

That should be = absolutely fine at 80Mbps.  PowerPC Macs seem to have good hi-res = timers in my experience, and the Sun GEM is a relatively good NIC. =  The main limitation is that it=E2=80=99s PCI rather than PCIe, so = it can=E2=80=99t reach the full GigE line rate, but it does go well = above 100Mbps.

Don=E2=80=99t worry about = BQL, since you=E2=80=99re not relying on NIC backpressure to control = queuing.

Ok, good news, then = that=E2=80=99s the way I=E2=80=99ll go! Thanks for that, more results = later...

Replacing the MBP (sky2 Ethernet = driver) with a PPC G4 with the Sun GEM appears to have fixed the class = of five-second-throughput-shifts that I reported earlier. See the much = smoother Cake results below. :) I=E2=80=99ll be re-running all of my = other tests again.

It does raise a new question though. In the 10 Mbit and 20 = Mbit Cake tests, one of the TCP download flows gets a bit starved = relative to the average. I was seeing this earlier also before I moved = to the PPC. I don=E2=80=99t see this at 30Mbit and above. There is also = a latency variation in 75Mbit fq_codel, so I know that sometimes you can = just say =E2=80=9Cit=E2=80=99s Wi-Fi=E2=80=9D. I don=E2=80=99t have the = time to check this on Ethernet now, but maybe later.

Cake:

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_10mbit/index.html=  (partial starvation for one tcp download flow)

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_20mbit/index.html=  (partial starvation for one tcp download flow)

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_30mbit/index.html=

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_40mbit/index.html=

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_50mbit/index.html=

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_60mbit/index.html=

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_70mbit/index.html=

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_75mbit/index.html=

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_80mbit/index.html=

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_85mbit/index.html=

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_90mbit/index.html=

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth_100mbit/index.htm= l

fq_codel:

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_10mbit/index.= html

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_20mbit/index.= html

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_30mbit/index.= html

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_40mbit/index.= html

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_50mbit/index.= html

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_60mbit/index.= html

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_70mbit/index.= html

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_75mbit/index.= html (latency variation and something wrong in one udp = flow)

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_80mbit/index.= html

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_85mbit/index.= html

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_90mbit/index.= html

http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/fq_codel_hd-eth_100mbit/index= .html

Pete

= --Apple-Mail=_914571A8-0BF6-4DFA-A531-F3852E198324--