From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-x230.google.com (mail-lf0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::230]) (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 626413CB37 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:41:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x230.google.com with SMTP id d20-v6so3296474lfe.3 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 08:41:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=XOVokrG3LvOAMvSAUYUPrJcO0H5ZCe0h2bNgfus72mo=; b=Iwr9L/zbuvlxwGICjpJLWESQkatJQxVg86j3jkOQSChEcJpwW5cPjg1WoGWScrXW2o YBxxBuJqXM/kCi0Zz+YjXrvO3RrGkGEkPxlLQJ7FfMC+v0cuTSzMhr8TylnpSpkrnarM 8+M87O+4Cx6yNa35Hi3TZPBj/J9EyTKvR+QC/aTy41yU2Qjfjk6bfg9DS+B/TADzkXkk ExXK2Z4W4A2Od4N2UfeNsbDmfrST3oxVRfbYI1ZzpKGzDSZlPo0OAx1hJn338gSuAKYL bENInaQraKzvGv+jNSASVcnsC5S9ji6hTCuoUGewTCBQJa5d22RN3C+V4gdVZEgDTtAq Ojlg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=XOVokrG3LvOAMvSAUYUPrJcO0H5ZCe0h2bNgfus72mo=; b=RPnEYjjEb6mlQyEGFbN4ahmNcdmH/59PtpMLdqd62c0Vc5oSH3KcXRvPZ/QEPgp95M SI6rjvThkSRFzbVP8ZbuTm18RFDhF8VUl16FPp/rSRtaUwelHriKjQM0ldfxOqoeBGvn Zw5KrAf8fiaanKhFar+dG52XjrxxnswS1XTXfJHA+NCJ+D80J83VIprHBFVPIgkqtgKc A0oN30GDqRZdP6WFp8IEgqRkwZuTWpCewfCslu0QwdJM7KGDYL6AkYtoPgYHl4bEZc6D UHWH6kjnqhj356E1x/T3q1k5MUfmTYrWymWduHawFs6NWt8spiGdvNY4Pzl3EGDt31AM R7LQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tD5XA9KEaMOktVElGZuz/XlzEXCAfhF4fh6gvwUHsS6Fd0xa73o l1zFX7yAtoeHv9Gd9s5u11I= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx49jWwOoiED5Ux8guyMxqsPIF7WLcFp0QABEabZRBYfOZ4sz+zzP8K+RJzT67vJPQRHIJsnA2A== X-Received: by 2002:a19:9884:: with SMTP id a126-v6mr3374735lfe.47.1523461268279; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 08:41:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.239.216] (83-245-237-197-nat-p.elisa-mobile.fi. [83.245.237.197]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d86sm248180ljd.45.2018.04.11.08.41.07 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 11 Apr 2018 08:41:07 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\)) From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: <87in8xahqp.fsf@toke.dk> Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 18:41:06 +0300 Cc: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <87in8xahqp.fsf@toke.dk> To: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20) 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 15:41:09 -0000 > On 11 Apr, 2018, at 6:24 pm, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen = wrote: >=20 > 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%). There's also a minor complication in that Cake and fq_codel behave = differently when handed superpackets. A fair comparison requires = switching aggregation modes off for both of them. All of my working hardware tends to saturate either the link or a PCI = bus before hitting a CPU limit, so I can't reproduce it locally. - Jonathan Morton