From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-x22e.google.com (mail-oi0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12F6821F623 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 04:47:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oi0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id l9so51835169oia.2 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 04:47:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JC5b6lUQ+J5clpXVjUAjQANa7RGzZQyMmP/17fFhJj0=; b=gDe8VdzF6qKeVFb0r/x00zB/g9d3P0AJohFP4ow3SYy4HHkAkUGTjcPOSN9tW7Z0X5 DbZVYO2u10g6Y2q3+iBaQqZJxJ3fBSge9/YGRKeQJq1T8qRW+O6Ax6KtxsPzIvzGX0HO 3ZYXflFKFuRLC1nN90CIW7sAPc1PzFnEWFol0Ao4Jx7OvSxwYYGtEdlr16SyQ0hXcafu uSKYy2Gx1SugtIiizJiTPs51xbBBpWVla8J8CuHl+XLy3xFVxlPfMqWdxDqATOpSuqzz XRwv0brTCu++N38SCzIPegtCy7ryZGb44yjwF+gdZL5Qa+3PdmjQDkvaDrNmVsg1xEeg jEgg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.202.197.18 with SMTP id v18mr5190196oif.116.1450615640977; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 04:47:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.202.187.3 with HTTP; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 04:47:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <56657A82.2080601@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> References: <6F86FBB0-AA69-44F3-82D0-31465906974D@gmx.de> <56657A82.2080601@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 13:47:20 +0100 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant , Jonathan Morton Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cake] second system syndrome X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Cake - FQ_codel the next generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 12:47:44 -0000 Jonathon, please comment on the proposals I laid out in: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cake/2015-December/000861.html On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant >>> I find myself torn by 3 things. >>> >>> 1) The number of huge wins in fixing wifi far outweigh what we have >>> thus far achieved, or not achieved, in cake. > The distractions of crappy wifi and then the FCC d=C3=A9b=C3=A2cle haven'= t helped > the focus on Cake one bit. Wifi is not a distraction for me. Crappy wifi was *why* I got involved in the whole bufferbloat project. I was otherwise quite happily retired. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=3D374680036761&set=3Dt.1483968819&t= ype=3D3&theater Everything else I've tackled... was to chase funding, or chase ideas that were working out on some front or another, or cope with the fears of people I respected... For 3 years now, we've had the ability to make a dent in some of wifi's problems. That's over a billion wifi devices shipped that could have had a better wifi stack. If I could just have one set of working wifi devices connecting me to San Juan Del Sur, in heavy rain, I'd be back at that pool, above, and logout from civilization again. > Personally speaking, there's a lack of clear project 'lead' - In my mind, jonathon is and has always been the project lead for cake. I was very happy when he signed up to do it, and went off in april to try to finally pull together enough resources to tackle wifi. One thing that went wrong with the cake project along the way was not being able to incrementally test each new idea. new rule: Thou Shalt NOT make changes to codel without being able to test at a wide variety of RTTs. And not being able to run perf on any architecture hurt too. I got grumpy when I started seeing featuritis (and yes, I contributed to this too, guilt also mine) and algorithmic changes without any realistic testing being done, and stepped in to try and fix these things. perf's fixed. I emphatically want to bail on me even thinking about cake. It is not my job to get it upstream, it is not my job to make it better. I think I have shown conclusively (by doing bcake) that a multitude of features and code bloat don't actually accomplish anything. There are still no realistic tests of very low bandwidth behavior... (which I've asked toke to poke into) >I persist > in my assertion that I'm not a coder, certainly not a confident one. > I've been reluctant to push commits to the repo with ideas/lunacy quite > frankly because I don't want to piss either you or Jonathan off by > messing with what I perceive to be 'his' code. I never feel that way about things. It's just "code". It is either good or it isn't. Lots of things are worth trying. Most of which aren't worth keeping. always happy to see new ideas. > On the other hand, some > things have happened (and stuck!) because I just blew a raspberry in the > general direction, said 'stuff it' and pushed - anything that went into > a feature branch got ignored, anything in 'master' got at least compiled > and possibly even reviewed. We should make better use of git & > (mis)feature branches. But there's need for a 'Linus' here. And a lot > more collaboration. Well, a dumazet would be more effective than a linus. The architectural choice here is mostly *what to take away*, which is nearly everything new in it, and get it upstream for further comments. Which are the choices I'd like jonathon to make, or at least comment on, which I laid out in my original mail. *not my job*. After the GRO code is proven I'd rip out sebastian's treasured last packet size stat, too. I might rip out all the dscp models in favor of the 3 tier sqm one. I'd go back to 32 bits for codel. My cup overfloweth. My job at the moment is to move the bloat related sites elsewhere before isc turns the power off next week.