From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: Adrian Popescu <adriannnpopescu@gmail.com>
Cc: Cake List <cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Cake] Dropping dropped
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 12:45:24 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA93jw6Zo_STv=Aq_iks75m5bAxBUHKnsuoXX-yKbHGKVHuo=g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAF3M4P1pqJkQMG7LOt4cTxpP4Z+SjDrm+4YXpXXaOCHL+rH4Cw@mail.gmail.com>
I still regard inbound shaping as our biggest deployment problem,
especially on cheap hardware.
Some days I want to go back to revisiting the ideas in the "bobbie"
shaper, other days...
In terms of speeding up cake:
* At higher speeds (e.g. > 200mbit) cake tends to bottleneck on a
single cpu, in softirq. A lwn article just went by about a proposed
set of improvements for that:
https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/779738/771e8f7050c26ade/
* Hardware multiqueue is more and more common (APU2 has 4). FQ_codel
is inherently parallel and could take advantage of hardware
multiqueue, if there was a better way to express it. What happens
nowadays is you get the "mq" scheduler with 4 fq_codel instances, when
running at line rate, but I tend to think with 64 hardware queues,
increasingly common in the >10GigE, having 64k fq_codel queues is
excessive. I'd love it if there was a way to have there be a divisor
in the mq -> subqdisc code so that we would have, oh, 32 queues per hw
queue in this case.
Worse, there's no way to attach a global shaped instance to that
hardware, e.g. in cake, which forces all those hardware queues (even
across cpus) into one. The ingress mirred code, here, is also a
problem. a "cake-mq" seemed feasible (basically you just turn the
shaper tracking into an atomic operation in three places), but the
overlying qdisc architecture for sch_mq -> subqdiscs has to be
extended or bypassed, somehow. (there's no way for sch_mq to
automagically pass sub-qdisc options to the next qdisc, and there's no
reason to have sch_mq
* I really liked the ingress "skb list" rework, but I'm not sure how
to get that from A to B.
* and I have a long standing dream of being able to kill off mirred
entirely and just be able to write
tc qdisc add dev eth0 ingress cake bandwidth X
* native codel is 32 bit, cake is 64 bit. I
* hashing three times as cake does is expensive. Getting a partial
hash and combining it into a final would be faster.
* 8 way set associative is slower than 4 way and almost
indistinguishable from 8. Even direct mapping
* The cake blue code is rarely triggered and inline
I really did want cake to be faster than htb+fq_codel, I started a
project to basically ressurrect "early cake" - which WAS 40% faster
than htb+fq_codel and add in the idea *only* of an atomic builtin
hw-mq shaper a while back, but haven't got back to it.
https://github.com/dtaht/fq_codel_fast
with everything I ripped out in that it was about 5% less cpu to start with.
I can't tell you how many times I've looked over
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/net/sched/sch_mqprio.c
hoping that enlightment would strike and there was a clean way to get
rid of that layer of abstraction.
But coming up with how to run more stuff in parallel was beyond my rcu-foo.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-15 20:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-14 14:01 Adrian Popescu
2019-02-14 14:35 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-02-15 8:23 ` Adrian Popescu
2019-02-15 10:55 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-02-15 20:45 ` Dave Taht [this message]
2019-02-16 9:35 ` Adrian Popescu
2019-02-18 20:42 ` Adrian Popescu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/cake.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAA93jw6Zo_STv=Aq_iks75m5bAxBUHKnsuoXX-yKbHGKVHuo=g@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=dave.taht@gmail.com \
--cc=adriannnpopescu@gmail.com \
--cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox