Cake - FQ_codel the next generation
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>
Cc: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>,
	Cake List <cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Cake] tossing acks into the background queue
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 07:12:55 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA93jw7vcsH5XscyC_z1YCQ2-HD0X2dtmNSF6jQwj5Ygzqe46g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87czmrcg0f.fsf@toke.dk>

On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 2:39 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> wrote:
>
> Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> writes:
>
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > On 23 November 2021 08:32:06 CET, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>The context of my question is basically this:
> >>
> >>Is cake baked? Is it done?
> >
> > How about per MAC address fairness (useful for ISPs and to treat
> > IPv4/6 equally)?
> >
> > How about configurable number of queues (again helpful for ISPs)?
>
> FWIW I don't think CAKE is the right thing for ISPs, except in a
> deployment where there's a single CAKE instance per customer. For
> anything else (i.e., a single shaper that handles multiple customers),
> you really need hierarchical policy enforcement like in a traditional
> HTB configuration. And retrofitting this on top of CAKE is going to
> conflict with the existing functionality, so it probably has to be a
> separate qdisc anyway.

What progress has been made on breaking the HTB locks in the last few years?

Given the enormous number of hw tx/rx queues we see today (64+ on
10gbit), trying to charge off
bandwidth per queue in a cake-derived shaper and protecting the merge
with rcu seemed plausible...

>
> > IMHO cake works pretty well, with the biggest issue being its CPU
> > demands. As far as I understand however, that is caused by the shaper
> > component and there low latency and throughput are in direct
> > competition, if we want to lower the CPU latency demands we need to
> > allow for bigger buffers that keep the link busy even if cake itself
> > is not scheduled as precisely as we would desire or as e.g. BQL
> > requires.
>
> Yes, as link speed increases, batching needs to increase to keep up.
> This does not *have* to impact latency, as the faster link should keep
> the granularity constant in the time domain. So experimenting with doing
> this dynamically in CAKE might be worthwhile, but probably not trivial.
>
> And either way, CAKE is still going to be limited by being single core
> only, and fixing that requires some serious surgery that I seem to
> recall looking into and giving up at some point :(

It was so long ago I don't remember what other issues came up at the time.

?

I am seeing nvidia offloading red and htb.

> -Toke



-- 
I tried to build a better future, a few times:
https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org

Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-11-23 15:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-11-23  5:03 Dave Taht
2021-11-23  7:07 ` Sebastian Moeller
2021-11-23  7:17   ` Dave Taht
2021-11-23  7:32     ` Dave Taht
2021-11-23  7:33       ` Dave Taht
2021-11-23  8:06       ` Sebastian Moeller
2021-11-23  8:27         ` Dave Taht
2021-11-23  9:03           ` Sebastian Moeller
2021-11-23 10:39         ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-11-23 11:31           ` Sebastian Moeller
2021-11-23 12:12             ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-11-23 15:12           ` Dave Taht [this message]
2021-11-23 15:49             ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-11-23  7:35     ` Sebastian Moeller

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=CAA93jw7vcsH5XscyC_z1YCQ2-HD0X2dtmNSF6jQwj5Ygzqe46g@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=dave.taht@gmail.com \
    --cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    --cc=moeller0@gmx.de \
    --cc=toke@toke.dk \
    /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