From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-oi0-x229.google.com (mail-oi0-x229.google.com
	[IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::229])
	(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 D0DE821FA04
	for <cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 03:34:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by oiak8 with SMTP id k8so6945911oia.1
	for <cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 03:34:35 -0700 (PDT)
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=P7o4W4tt0V4K89qCuHLmUuvw9r1Rj6JCURU4eVhwn20=;
	b=YwNoKD6tsOU9LZWXdMrgUHioRaR61LvSvxqV4KikcDSxmk9Zmz04LxXj2BIwdlomuq
	TjxvqAESLXPM8IllMzrUVuTuNtTvA9i69X8N274Jwp0GNco8XGT9CQeMmHe+7ZYBb2Rh
	uMAMuUuFdXkLYDClFjNztgPVicxc6eqxU+pJG606bC7nt/YXaO3QtOoW+aEjtpxGxTDD
	Q6ZVR5ISaeZYScjNODcSvHP4iobsACXNVBKUaukV61AHoln1cnSW6kiPhmCJAQp/qXFR
	FY3AGdoU8aQChm9/QO6EGdocVap5R19AhjdkxNIUp3/sua7t9F+kFKmJnfXQ2pqBAAGM
	p4+Q==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.11.72 with SMTP id 69mr17877902oil.110.1444732475738;
	Tue, 13 Oct 2015 03:34:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.202.108.212 with HTTP; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 03:34:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <561CDB4E.4000000@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk>
References: <561CDB4E.4000000@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:34:35 +0200
Message-ID: <CAA93jw5x9zJxN6ZvyMJ+S3Y+mt6dA_QVQJV+4QwK+zUPqBK4EQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant <kevin@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Cake] Cake parameter anomaly?
X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
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: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 10:35:00 -0000

active_flows was a parameter that was in one version or another that
was exposed to the API. It was very useful and interesting.

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant
<kevin@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> wrote:
> Hi List,
>
> In pkt_sched.h we see an enumeration for 'TCA_CAKE_ACTIVE_FLOWS':
>
> /* CAKE */
> enum {
>         TCA_CAKE_UNSPEC,
>         TCA_CAKE_BASE_RATE,
>         TCA_CAKE_DIFFSERV_MODE,
>         TCA_CAKE_ATM,
>         TCA_CAKE_FLOW_MODE,
>         TCA_CAKE_OVERHEAD,
>         TCA_CAKE_ACTIVE_FLOWS,
>         TCA_CAKE_RTT,
>         TCA_CAKE_TARGET,
>         __TCA_CAKE_MAX
> };
> #define TCA_CAKE_MAX    (__TCA_CAKE_MAX - 1)
>
> These enumerations are normally used for passing options from tc into
> the cake module, but at the present time, nowhere in either cake or tc
> can I see use of 'ACTIVE_FLOWS'.  It's not read as an input into cake,
> nor is it sent out of cake back to tc via the nla_policy.
>
> Is this a 'typo' from when bulk/sparse flows reporting was put into the
> stats, or is it some as yet unimplemented feature?
>
> I've meant to ask about this before but it sort of got lost.
>
> Kevin
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cake mailing list
> Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
>



--=20
Dave T=C3=A4ht
Do you want faster, better, wifi? https://www.patreon.com/dtaht