From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt0-x230.google.com (mail-qt0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::230]) (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 BB20D3BA8E for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 14:47:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qt0-x230.google.com with SMTP id j7-v6so29409233qtp.2 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 11:47:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=tb3hvPz6dfV1WqzjRjaZL2YdY+E2MF+hoOa2V0PLI3w=; b=dq/3UbBBadKOPsP+RyESo6KNBsaIUItYmP7RHKjwWRKnV3RcCwpgh8rkMbgG7o93H2 k3h9ybBhXoHkkZFKtY5Xj7Xm9L+w/sl/4AXhpJcXzLkcQcRqsgKfAUbpuGlGrXErTnjT Xb5r7qSCyf23P90LY31ASq7ItSv9LHv9FvpZA0udeGyaU45Xu5GpS1I5l5gheNa67UcA YumIZQSSUWPdthj8Kv6mzTz3Wr/qVVcw5rVGr0duCmjPGvwWcx4CFPOGsVffHyJJbRkH Pgtu5OhrU6op0HqwoC2Fk+ctj2sR9cqsd/+yenPMmD5UH5fl+QpNggfIF3of36jFHULv hx7g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=tb3hvPz6dfV1WqzjRjaZL2YdY+E2MF+hoOa2V0PLI3w=; b=GabAuosto6p03/0sRupzpMsgrYCQfj3Ft6/ddyRD9zUTpCBLV+ZHpkEtdoLcMq5uQC GWPXqkuKsPWqr44M1PpnruV+MGGtVwTGMn/GK+GIpid+9BFV1do1O/7EKxTzASjbfWOG /ms3YdGAblptsggmGakRcxXtjY/S6b1lWHuk1s8GZQMxSTIcCbZ5HD3fsSWofXepEML8 WZ6lWsF+yTEi1tC0m2AkWA5B2RfWZpbx7Bnv40qjPg2dUEZebpjf6OXtPBk1eCPI3JhL FRMezH330/UTsMVYOeAK93+/OCiWx00vA3/sqcTBcLB6BlSLunWpQaetWKvp1BnhNesp TP/A== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51DVfAnyO7F3+DVgO8NRZXZw6yEDYEIE0eyAvUUHNBPdjzcJ3tTn 5KfZlLlsEDYwjrrZ2+aeY+RCOtQQl7m1zhb1bqA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdahjseeaUgc9OQart3jhDhms8gL5BdfjVpHAxNCV+x7nbQBm8IbtNbwpPRIuXggJyv9r+4K8TxgaUs4O5Z6QqY= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:2ea1:: with SMTP id h30-v6mr20681876qta.135.1536691659290; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 11:47:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87zhwxzh8o.fsf@toke.dk> <139B295B-7371-43DE-B472-DE629C9B8432@heistp.net> <87efe65wol.fsf@toke.dk> <6C556301-015B-4903-AE5A-F22D3517FFCC@heistp.net> <79F47FB1-6B00-4753-930B-950FB8CD3850@gmx.de> <8E0ECFFC-37A0-4DC3-91C9-27793B1C18E5@heistp.net> <5C7BA623-F83E-4B93-9997-1099DEC2392C@gmx.de> <5F35DA9A-C881-4D7F-9F9E-E3CFC49F8A25@heistp.net> In-Reply-To: <5F35DA9A-C881-4D7F-9F9E-E3CFC49F8A25@heistp.net> From: Dave Taht Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 11:47:27 -0700 Message-ID: To: Pete Heist Cc: Sebastian Moeller , Cake List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Cake] Cake vs fq_codel and c/burst on an ER-X bridge 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, 11 Sep 2018 18:47:39 -0000 On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 11:45 AM Pete Heist wrote: > > > On Sep 11, 2018, at 8:28 PM, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > > > Yeah, good point, I left nat there because I had one port configured for = routing and the other for the bridge and was sometimes swapping between the= two. I realize now I actually sent the numbers for routing, not bridging. = Bridging without =E2=80=98nat=E2=80=99 looks a bit higher (155 Mbit for cak= e instead of 135 Mbit). I would re-do all these tests for completeness but = I=E2=80=99m out of time now. > > > Ouch, a ten percent bandwidth cost for the nat feature certainly answeers= the question whether nat should be the default=E2=80=A6 > > > That probably has a lot to do with routing vs bridging though also. If I = turn QoS off, the ER-X does about 250Mbit when routing and 280Mbit with the= soft bridge, so that=E2=80=99s probably most of that difference. I=E2=80= =99m not seeing a throughput difference above random noise between =E2=80= =98nat=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98nonat=E2=80=99. When I benchmarked it before I= saw an ~1.5% CPU difference, not nothing. > > The last time we discussed the bust issue, I could not manage to see any = difference with or without a specified burst, but I strongly believe I simp= ly did not properly test. Btw, this is unidirectional shaping or with bidir= ectional saturation? > > > Unidirectional. I definitely see a difference, but I wonder what criteria= we (and I) used for =E2=80=9Cout of CPU=E2=80=99 in the past. > > > So totally unscientifically me yardstick was as long as throughput increa= ses more or less linearly with configured shaper bandwidth things are fine,= and then at the candidate bandwidths I ran "top -d 1" and monitored both i= dle% ad sirq% with idle falling below 5% being a strong indicator of bottle= necking on cpu cycles. Dlakelan over at github (https://github.com/dlakelan= /routerperf) is working on a small side project that aims for tighter multi= -core aware logging of cpu usage on a router, but that has not left the ear= ly prototype stage. > > > Ok, my frustration with the testing has also been variable results from r= un to run. My inner self is saying, yes, do some testing, but don=E2=80=99t= spend too much time on it when it has this stochastic side to it. > _______________________________________________ > Cake mailing list > Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake My inner self is saying... "go out and enjoy the beautiful fall weather, while it lasts." --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-669-226-2619