From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-x22b.google.com (mail-it0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22b]) (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 D23A53CB45 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 14:55:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-it0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id 142-v6so4112391itl.5 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:55:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=XT9NwXiza2wALRVyoENnsFro0CVrhXDrmaTiiXYBwhM=; b=axPy8xMK3yPqL4R3GNVloo9IcyGTS4GQ9BiPKD45q4oLBfhwC72+adNiwaj0P0Szqh O2R9CaJQ1+XHXPJCh0AMFf+BCLuSzwNjK9rvXX8gc2/KRdvKwvQU0K6wx04SfpAcdZlC dk+ulo91TOUtsDS/qSracM7j1xAEV+SR7AkogIB53z8clccjIlTk32zgNR26csg99xkq cZzY/f3AQzPcJ8avArdM2q35A6WckzWcsxKwm82OzYF1tR81iK0yTRL7ey15okOIq7dS 6qgeq/opp98NDc+bskwIekXn2oaj9MTJJ7MR0vT1Lb2BEwQBgA90jtNtI/ItGZp3vOzr 980g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=XT9NwXiza2wALRVyoENnsFro0CVrhXDrmaTiiXYBwhM=; b=W4/l+ix9y5gyQG1+QJfyb1GGs7xCETg80mBVSoEGE+F5Ycq1duS0jlL3dG4EXfBsul 1tAuqVLWXXZTv5w9xfvk4cdOiG3qtaFbwXMOdetboCVee7LUp9zwsXl/sdivgC6dxkJ1 nwUZbU9z1kNdveQO2cUxCzOsluVs0tQmVxYNghbKLQ0LjgfC0ySDBsglvEfmj4yZz3K2 K8Gz17J32g4/85spbekRShK01ZaAY7yQyM3uRm1ZE+rAM8cIt4qYq5iBqrijg+19GtgG Rpt1vqastdU1Aq33Cn4sUsMaKqjhkA1pGS808TznQkRLjfqX/DaU6dXSpMtz1x4jl6ho fr8Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tA3aND65fRr1E/GNVKj1u1Au9fYPf4Wwt+WOcbX7xq9zb5Ffjo5 c46XivWsGx5QWF5CsnoQYpiZEw/SxktDMBjpR44= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4+n5eMykte2Q5vsDEE6zN2IqXO2JHDhFpeEYYwXQLbBHSaaSwAt/tokzV8YK1FOwfmzWUZmTRAruyd+B3hzVfc= X-Received: by 2002:a24:7dc5:: with SMTP id b188-v6mr5576229itc.68.1523472913309; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:55:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.2.108.133 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:55:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <874lkhacli.fsf@toke.dk> References: <87in8xahqp.fsf@toke.dk> <874lkhacli.fsf@toke.dk> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jonas_M=C3=A5rtensson?= Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 20:55:12 +0200 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?B?VG9rZSBIw7hpbGFuZC1Kw7hyZ2Vuc2Vu?= Cc: Jonathan Morton , cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d2a5240569972de7" Subject: Re: [Cake] Cake not more CPU efficient than HTB+FQ-CoDel (anymore)? X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Cake - FQ_codel the next generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 18:55:13 -0000 --000000000000d2a5240569972de7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 7:15 PM, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen wrote: > Jonathan Morton writes: > > >> On 11 Apr, 2018, at 6:24 pm, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen > wrote: > >> > >> So, um, did we cram so many features into Cake that it no longer uses > >> less CPU? Can anyone confirm these results? > > > > To be sure about this, it seems wise to configure Cake to turn off as > > many of the new features as possible. That means selecting "besteffort > > flows nonat" mode at least. > > > > I forget whether simplest.qos correctly uses the built-in shaper with > > Cake, rather than just layering it with HTB as usual. If not, then of > > course Cake will use more CPU, and we should be grateful that it's by > > a relatively small margin (maybe 15%). > > It is definitely using Cake as the shaper; in besteffort mode, but with > nat and triple-isolation enabled I think. I'll run another test tomorrow > with those disabled. Is there any difference between using simplest.qos and piece_of_cake.qos when Cake is used as qdisc? /Jonas --000000000000d2a5240569972de7 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 7:15 PM, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen <toke@tok= e.dk> wrote:
Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> writes:

>> On 11 Apr, 2018, at 6:24 pm, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen <= toke@toke.dk> wrote:
>>
>> So, um, did we cram so many features into Cake that it no longer u= ses
>> less CPU? Can anyone confirm these results?
>
> To be sure about this, it seems wise to configure Cake to turn off as<= br> > many of the new features as possible. That means selecting "beste= ffort
> flows nonat" mode at least.
>
> I forget whether simplest.qos correctly uses the built-in shaper with<= br> > Cake, rather than just layering it with HTB as usual. If not, then of<= br> > course Cake will use more CPU, and we should be grateful that it's= by
> a relatively small margin (maybe 15%).

It is definitely using Cake as the shaper; in besteffort mode, but w= ith
nat and triple-isolation enabled I think. I'll run another test tomorro= w
with those disabled.

Is there any differenc= e between using simplest.qos and piece_of_cake.qos when Cake is used as qdi= sc?

/Jonas

--000000000000d2a5240569972de7--