From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-qt0-x229.google.com (mail-qt0-x229.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::229])
 (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 B497C3B29E
 for <Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 11:57:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x229.google.com with SMTP id b15-v6so31012201qtp.11
 for <Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 08:57:34 -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; bh=xeSiHOSLcyXpbf9Dg1QnLQIk8VP3jSxIYtmUcdXzp7U=;
 b=HBrDkjXNxX3D2K6zBQBhPQz1Huk1av09nqwqaJak778vGij3a7hcSIFZ53QuFfDHfE
 6x5F8l+SHYixgBAuy/ZHb+a+nKNyln2oQe9njq8VLcwQ8qv5rSzWKax5xdC3rOD7rp0e
 71dz9vmtVkUIFbbW/ZsZdzVVYLebqoWaP26B095sapRZnCh0noRPOY7L6usvtUdsT8WL
 BoGzmNmvJL9e4/Wo9vVbb/u8Fa0R62InoF3G9PjjWWkBSzco70fYWy8Zb9iRlVpdD3+2
 LDckZroRlrjLZd+9WklX81NNxOkAG0bubD4RsmSPessnGiXGphEyjs6Ud1KkVRb2lSlv
 4kCg==
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;
 bh=xeSiHOSLcyXpbf9Dg1QnLQIk8VP3jSxIYtmUcdXzp7U=;
 b=LQiKXbaXSpJsfGJYBJCosWTwlxWJbE6k5qoxGOPAoBLmo17U58bLLw3TJZbUvK2sa8
 O5Vc6pTUI16qsYhH6ZO4giW+W1zGYbFGP4BvvleLOyfe8QN3jpdqjY0AqUrdwt7kSGTI
 MzYMbMnQ83MskpWwSAxIUrVNkUQ6c/+alW0xRzGK6z5k4M8Gag1hXlBYaA8Ov/V4FhT6
 H9/UQSyR2hZXbc070zAIta0VjmSIU0NPtmfkaJkrz2oHqFG7PGUNnkC2SfQp6SgB32b1
 aEaKYDz4pOb23sbOPStHE+0T20n1EaF3d+rgCrVFv5Q2Ek4jJwvlaFnaX9T64SCdQ1zN
 jzkA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlHZRd4AJCqblO6HiPLEjWQhv3g3LNHx0XKm73/JrGfJcuoR3wa7
 IgB/ExYSjUIfoTNbHcbqsIi6IYsh7j3zhEWT76I=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdGaMFPa/DQfS2nWfgz1ebFL71O+/cW5WvAoQSJgx6ajNf2sIte/5HEENCrmrldlOrFxFMQteUovuAGGoqyRBE=
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:683:: with SMTP id
 f3-v6mr12432908qth.104.1531670254257; 
 Sun, 15 Jul 2018 08:57:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAO2Qn5nF432bL7R1bNiQ2+o1D6UvB5ytx2MML5NtihHQc+zoFg@mail.gmail.com>
 <3E2FE0BD-3A6C-4399-90FB-1334A7A0D962@gmail.com> <87o9f895ei.fsf@toke.dk>
In-Reply-To: <87o9f895ei.fsf@toke.dk>
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 08:57:23 -0700
Message-ID: <CAA93jw6s4j8QccXtAxyMA=HZQ+guKvVxBiwzevm-O1r4QwfnHQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?VG9rZSBIw7hpbGFuZC1Kw7hyZ2Vuc2Vu?= <toke@toke.dk>
Cc: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>, dagofthedofg@gmail.com, 
 Cake List <Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Subject: Re: [Cake] Multiple Hardware Queues
X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
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: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 15:57:34 -0000

I note that I like the idea of cake-mq (or rather, cake-smp). If we
can currently achieve 50gbit bottlenecking on one cpu, what can be
done to get past 100gbit?

tc qdisc add dev eth root cake-smp bandwidth 100gbit

has a nice ring to it don't you think? :)

* BQL's estimator is essentially additive. If you have 64 hw queues
(common in 10gige hw), you've got a ton of inessential latency that
builds up there due to bulking.

* I have grave doubts about 64k aqm'd queues at any speed. Better to
have less queues.

* In a naive parallel implementation (and excluding some painful
implementation details) - only the global shaped bandwidth limit has a
need for atomic, cross cpu access, and even that can essentially be
rcu'd.