From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-x241.google.com (mail-lf0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::241]) (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 81A143B2A4 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 03:49:42 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-lf0-x241.google.com with SMTP id v186so2344466lfa.2 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:49:42 -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 :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=rEQkmwyQeIqFVp3b7Qp8VEUc3wQWbqYP0rIy6YfMUd8=; b=ocSt/nS3A6VJ+3OCehKUUoYl6b2hPlko6wfYJcXs5y1pVOSIpld0W5mNxtsTolFw0j qRy6/BMmuCiAxa48RL8CWiQGMgi6+qMGZLiSWZ8Leq1u3xkCSZhVxIFiWmhXPOAmkpjJ /zPyJN/lIhbv5yDlMRY3nfI6tKMK3lu8VFT+7TYWwGx1Il9wnjrbU8UxY05WEfLPkmYa dzhyChYHPeabxyy4HfkiEIoFKUcct4dqJbZhybrrDF9BQO8dQVi7smyHle/SyPj4C2DR LcdLqIxcE6aBSdCwFRygUQTGkjRIdx+397NqCX/gntcIPoXKmU0oNS+ODL4P0XZWZZ7D Xrqg== 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 :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=rEQkmwyQeIqFVp3b7Qp8VEUc3wQWbqYP0rIy6YfMUd8=; b=eZUuofRjjMp38SjuAPjzchhyj8jtYkktW5J2tw1wgAdfde0px6niHNq+7xFmWv+hhm SWn2YLQ1U9vOsh+ANmJNEQIcOt94nxkDnLAg+7x83zhmcfPHg69e77hIqRMWSMQvVt79 XVftGbTz4CqEZOSGxzw44InJqnA+TnFgEFUHpNUkp2RoAL+IRJErp70hYgszYPNtSd4D WraoFLsUvgBe9n/GbUoDDabi0gBnF7Zw+JOuljlSpKHpHCCQodaGbHGxLLvk4BDeIUN7 lOiNSmG8SZiYlQsxfT3jiUtfhG2Do06bUftSdjMZQPnYX+iA571Y/wT4+UeJSsR9K0qm LXuw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39na48NaRa07c3iYg1jWG+801zV2rkThRLRnR7bAJf+urfNX2nWcZCVPvWdmhVMQgg== X-Received: by 10.25.162.146 with SMTP id l140mr2585928lfe.50.1486716580559; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:49:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.100.16] (37-219-206-78.nat.bb.dnainternet.fi. [37.219.206.78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c1sm316786lfg.9.2017.02.10.00.49.38 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:49:39 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: <830143EE-20F2-42A5-A4FC-ECE7DF50C632@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 10:49:36 +0200 Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <459B9F17-317F-465E-8D2F-361CF47E5F32@gmail.com> <3D9E1A43-0182-4A1F-8262-6F587A79254E@gmail.com> <830143EE-20F2-42A5-A4FC-ECE7DF50C632@gmail.com> To: Pete Heist 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: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 08:49:42 -0000 > On 10 Feb, 2017, at 10:04, Pete Heist wrote: >=20 > I look forward to the throughput shifts being solved, where I see = results like this: >=20 > = http://www.drhleny.cz/bufferbloat/cake_hd-eth-ap_100ms_80mbit/index.html That basically looks like it=E2=80=99s run out of CPU, so there=E2=80=99s = hard choices to make over CPU allocation. Cake isn=E2=80=99t = responsible for that allocation, though it *might* be possible to = optimise its use of the CPU a little further. If you can obtain a CPU profile of that workload on that hardware, that = might help to direct those efforts. - Jonathan Morton