From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <toke@toke.dk>
Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00ACA3CB48
 for <cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 15:08:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= <toke@toke.dk>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023;
 t=1523473706; bh=nSu9/kajm/LFxKA8eEr98VepEg8c1GgF/C40N3PSIWo=;
 h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From;
 b=jRbxxt+a50tV3nptvrk+FnP13FGkp/VBGAQrs7cGOqPT+np19MNMyEoncpZpojEeY
 SuLOyYkWNbsRVmyPfl+2RLJMx3j3NY+4M+5flQ8UYJ7vTbn1cUXkR+og2ip1WFeDb3
 4o6JykWpNu+yT3N2WNxG00XvPriV+iQnWswr+LB7OnKueZWUv/qQQ/3eIkdxTlJDh/
 ovpepHrSWWBGwS+juGX34ShldsALzh03PcAXoYGZ/3qUXk+fSwsa/K0PhBYpIHsmVs
 rP5By4fD7b4mVMvepQ4YT48e+bHemJ0rPK68AeQMuHRfN4PxiInP+PbsMfHIP059XH
 AEDawyTC6Rl1A==
To: Jonas =?utf-8?Q?M=C3=A5rtensson?= <martensson.jonas@gmail.com>
Cc: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>, cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
In-Reply-To: <CAM9iV=JeOLdSh7j=UWR5DzVrRQ8ZFnaAsEP0OVM-f9-Yf40=Og@mail.gmail.com>
References: <87in8xahqp.fsf@toke.dk>
 <CE52664C-7F35-4299-A0E1-531F42A2B04A@gmail.com> <874lkhacli.fsf@toke.dk>
 <CAM9iV=JeOLdSh7j=UWR5DzVrRQ8ZFnaAsEP0OVM-f9-Yf40=Og@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 21:08:26 +0200
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Message-ID: <87muy98st1.fsf@toke.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Cake] Cake not more CPU efficient than HTB+FQ-CoDel (anymore)?
X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: Cake - FQ_codel the next generation <cake.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/cake>,
 <mailto:cake-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cake>
List-Post: <mailto:cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:cake-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake>,
 <mailto:cake-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 19:08:28 -0000

Jonas M=C3=A5rtensson <martensson.jonas@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 7:15 PM, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen <toke@t=
oke.dk>
> wrote:
>
>> Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> >> On 11 Apr, 2018, at 6:24 pm, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen <toke@t=
oke.dk>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> So, um, did we cram so many features into Cake that it no longer uses
>> >> less CPU? Can anyone confirm these results?
>> >
>> > To be sure about this, it seems wise to configure Cake to turn off as
>> > many of the new features as possible. That means selecting "besteffort
>> > flows nonat" mode at least.
>> >
>> > I forget whether simplest.qos correctly uses the built-in shaper with
>> > Cake, rather than just layering it with HTB as usual. If not, then of
>> > course Cake will use more CPU, and we should be grateful that it's by
>> > a relatively small margin (maybe 15%).
>>
>> It is definitely using Cake as the shaper; in besteffort mode, but with
>> nat and triple-isolation enabled I think. I'll run another test tomorrow
>> with those disabled.
>
>
> Is there any difference between using simplest.qos and piece_of_cake.qos
> when Cake is used as qdisc?

Not really, no. piece_of_cake understands the zero_dscp_ingress option,
simplest.qos does not. I think that is the only difference.

I just used simplest.qos because that made it easier to switch between
fq_codel and cake ;)

-Toke