From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
To: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Cake] [NetDev-People] 0x19: Talk, mq-cake: Scaling software rate limiting across CPU cores
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 13:30:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8734gmrnhq.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5DFA90A5-9FDB-4B3E-8C80-A33D02632E7E@gmx.de>
Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> writes:
> Hi Toke,
>
>
>> On 10. Feb 2025, at 11:35, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> writes:
>>
>>> 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).
>>
>> Well, even if there are only 2 CPUs, the MQ version can utilise both of
>> those in one direction, which helps for asymmetrical traffic :)
>
> Fair point, I was thinking bi directional saturating traffic on a
> symmetric link, which I guess is far from the typical use case ;)
Exactly :)
>>
>>> I wonder, does this work for IFBs as well or only for real hardware
>>> NIC queues?
>>
>> Yup, you can specify the number of TX queues on an ifb interface when
>> creating it (ip link add numtxqueues 2 type ifb).
>
> Great, so this will then work even if the true NIC hardware is not
> multi-queue capable or does numtxqueues need to be <= true number of
> NIC queues?
Hmm, no, ifb queues are independent, so yeah, I guess ingress shaping
could scale regardless of the number of HWQs...
-Toke
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-10 12:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAM0EoM=bFMVMV-f2n4BNSJoqOAxqr+kcJ9kg2NLVvmw2rX-2WA@mail.gmail.com>
2025-02-10 9:30 ` [Cake] Fwd: " Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2025-02-10 10:11 ` [Cake] " Sebastian Moeller
2025-02-10 10:35 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2025-02-10 12:06 ` Sebastian Moeller
2025-02-10 12:30 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen [this message]
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=8734gmrnhq.fsf@toke.dk \
--to=toke@redhat.com \
--cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=moeller0@gmx.de \
/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