From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mout.gmx.net", Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass DE-1" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E4C021F558 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:41:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from u-089-d068.biologie.uni-tuebingen.de ([134.2.89.68]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LejNC-1Ylpdu23FW-00qQ7l; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 18:41:36 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 18:41:32 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <26463A88-821B-44B7-A728-64BCB0B7C7BB@gmx.de> References: To: Alan Jenkins X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:Brh3gqbGlmghGlmoORO+rENLLYzaL21bPiosi9o5O3Z9V4VpQOv iEAzqd/py/AbcXUCUqCNGZIwrnWwFYQsPHbioe/p5dCId5wJvjb6EV6op3WgyEYOMe0w8ru +gln6MOeDQqTHQVuUfXdl/S8o5HvFfB4rUNHDH1eknDAfGr7IZ+29DbZBS61dID/ndZPTzb yIPTRihTGaQeDD5kWj1sA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:WAU9JsVtZIE=:oeL+jwBD8vTYUECAzYMVKh zGZ7BUfZBOBjLIMpaV6fTlru+jedr/z5klRRrsUYQatzNO/mx4NC8yYBAf4itzoX76KR6tPjf CMKpR8iM5MDKHYQ3sb8OZOJiIuYGut2xVBW13VmdvS2HjcWkqHkxUY7fZPiorQh+iiH89aX/5 LNBFkGw93YnzNfHYnkXeD5lyVevwH2KjrQk06O0XtTtPyAimMd7Fmxmb0iKOXS7YzmUgeLg3Z 5MDJYkK4uQnO9U1UNQ4Jx6UpUmQptp+zWHBW8TKJbV97Muoi+2r2pY0EFxAhjIsp1u1gyA+b4 anf9hy+akZxoWNWJkLj5uUtGA9A/LejExiAQRKJLcUETUK2PjFq3P9K4xxUBJECVdnKlgnoT9 rMtQ6e3QhkxthEeWLBmRsZ2YNqjNBI7BCth8w2bhXEIEG5YivhGjgriXTqIarktbL57aCr//6 mAbaupjjo1/QIwP+X0NHJ0e+knnjd8ejxAeQilhA+pPBULMkUQjt96kzUOQWAxT6/Qd0ihowj eXbTRDV4Bwl+H0qEKWC6AOp2k+rUhMToxyVZSTqQiocI1DRZk9ZkTpJKx7CVwIqqdOfQIaPo4 2ezDDjS8AxYDCegkuhKK3DJ1qDB64xN8+j0D3Y+apO/MXfDuWl30avHrce01JuiD8D0GvrTfr mg6LwPleXh/gma1K/yoiAlGLpeHLlLpelh5PSuiIuOaCzgN4VuToFbL2+04uuO7cizKY= Cc: Jonathan Morton , cerowrt-devel Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Latest build test - new sqm-scripts seem to work; "cake overhead 40" didn't X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 16:42:09 -0000 Hi Alan, excellent, thanks a million. On Jun 19, 2015, at 16:44 , Alan Jenkins = wrote: > Hi >=20 > I guess I've done the complementary half to Seb's test :). Basically > "cake overhead 40" didn't work, but that's the fault of cake in this > build. Or tc, as Johnathan suggested. (The "cake atm" part seems to > work, as per my previous test). Great! >=20 > "tc qdisc" says "cake overhead 0", as Sebastian noticed. And the test > results show "cake overhead 40" does not give a measurable > improvement. But "tc stab overhead 40" does. >=20 > I ran this test with the updated sqm-scripts and I think they're doing > the right thing. Thanks for testing this, especially as I can not due to a lack = of an ADSL-link (and lack of cake actually, last I looked all I could = find was cookies in my browser and a promise of pie in my router) >=20 >=20 > Method: >=20 > I used the updated files from sqm-scripts, >=20 > (once I remembered to mark them executable. Lacking that causes a > failure with no error messages, because sqm-scripts checks before > running them :) >=20 > but didn't bother updating & using luci-app-sqm. Ah, okay, I guess I did test this part with Dave=92s help, so = this should work with the most recent sqm.lua. >=20 > The test was to compare netperf-runner results - ping during combined > upload & download - for "overhead 40" and "overhead 0". I tested both > values of linklayer_adaptation_mechanism. >=20 > I had to repeat 6 times (60s per run for each overhead) because of > random variation in the range of 3-4ms. I alternated "overhead 40" > and "overhead 0" to try and exclude longer-term variation effects. >=20 > With "stab overhead 40", median latency was better by about 3-4ms. > With "cake overhead 40", there is no such effect. Intersting, when I still had a 6M/1M ADSL link, I saw much = larger latency under load increases when setting the per packet overhead = to small, but I had my egress shaper running at 100% of line rate, so = the system was rigged for maximum effect that way. How are your shapers = typically set?=20 >=20 > I'm confident of the result. I just need to set up the scripting > capability in flent now. Running this manually takes too long! >=20 Best Regards Sebastian > Alan >=20 >=20 > On 18/06/2015, Sebastian Moeller wrote: >>=20 >> Not sure I can test functionality, but at least I could confirm = the >> following: >> 1) using the tc stab link layer adjustment method with cake could = work >> (needs testing, td-d qdisc reports all the right things). >>=20 >> 2) the advanced qdisc option strings are passed to cake now, which = might >> increase the potential tester pool. >> 2.1) these option strings are truly dangerous: one typo or invalid = keyword >> and cake will not start up in that direction without any notice; =93no = error >> checking=94 indeed. >>=20 >> 3) somehow the installed cake version has issues with numeric = overheads, or >> at least with reporting them. >> cake will accept =93overhead N=94 arguments so it clearly = understands they are >> valid (otherwise see 2.1). >> But it does keep reporting =93raw=94 in =93tc -d qdisc=94 while = it should report >> some number istead of raw there. >>=20 >> =93atm overhead 40=94 gets reported as =93qdisc cake 802d: dev = ifb4eth1 root >> refcnt 2 bandwidth 45Mbit besteffort flows atm overhead 0=93 >> So clearly something is off with either cake or tc on that host. >> @Jonathan, any idea what this might be caused by? >>=20 >> 4) My changes not made the router go off-line... >>=20 >> 5) I wonder whether we should not give cake its own script cake.qos, = that >> would keep simple and simplest more readable and the cake script = should be >> refreshingly concise ;) >>=20 >>=20 >>>=20 >>> So you can't count on getting accurate results this way, but can at >>> least test functionality. >>=20 >> The main tests that needed doing, is do the changes from the GUI = propagate >> into the enabled sqm instances. It seems they do, so my changes are = save >> enough for the greater/smaller hard-core tester community. For actual >> functional tests we need an actual ADSL-link where link-layer = adjustments >> issues can readily be observed=85 >>=20 >>>=20 >>> My plan, such as it was, was to get back to 3 source specific = gateways >>> but have run into barrier after barrier. >>=20 >> Maybe we should not have =93forked=94 cerowrt before BB was = released, by the >> looks of it you could use a barrier breaker. (Sorry can not resist a = bad >> pun/joke, was a long day today=85) >>=20 >> Best Regards >> Sebastian >>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Sebastian Moeller >>> wrote: >>>> Hi Dave, >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On Jun 18, 2015, at 22:18 , Dave Taht wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Sebastian Moeller = >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Hi Dave, >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Jun 18, 2015, at 21:33 , Dave Taht = wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> My present box under test is at 2601:646:8300:2cba::129 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> You know the default password for ssh. It is also accessible via >>>>>>> https://[2601:646:8300:2cba::129/] >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Just the joy of being able to play with cake, made me commit = a >>>>>> new change ;) This changes a get_cake_lla_string to >>>>>> `get_cake_lla_string` which in turn might actually do something. = I want >>>>>> to note that currently this only passes the numerically defined >>>>>> overhead variable from the GUI to the cake call and side steps = the >>>>>> issue how to present the symbolic options. I think this should be = fine >>>>>> as current cake users should be seasoned enough to just shrug off = this >>>>>> slight inconvenience ;) >>>>>> I only noticed that as I just added the tc_stab link layer >>>>>> adjustment method to the cake calls in simple.qos/simplest.qos so = that >>>>>> the different methods can be validated against each other (which = was >>>>>> helpful when we had issues with HTB=92s private link layer = adjustments). >>>>>=20 >>>>> My favorite thing with cake is doing a watch tc -s qdisc show dev >>>>> whatever and looking at the sp(arse) statistic under load. My = (ietf) >>>>> world is full of people that think 100ms delay is ok, seeing usec >>>>> makes me happy, and knowing that cake is "peeling" apart the often >>>>> huge packets is quite nice also. >>>>=20 >>>> A good to know. >>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> High on my list now that I am heads down in getting snmpd to work >>>>> again is to somehow parse various outputs to show drop and CE = events >>>>> in mrtg and/or cacti. >>>>>=20 >>>>> I do wish I could find ways to make everyone more productive. I = could >>>>> put a box up in my co-lo next week, if that would help, but = reflashing >>>>> is a problem no matter where I go. >>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> It is one iteration behind jonathon's cake, and one iteration = now >>>>>>> behind sebastian. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Make that two iterations ;) >>>>>=20 >>>>> K. Me busy. I will try to keep this box up on this ip for as long = as I >>>>> can. I had hoped to flash 6 routers this week. >>>>=20 >>>> Ooops, so I just manually hoisted that boxes sqm-scripts and = GUI >>>> to my current development state (I overwrote sqm.lua for = luck-app-sqm, >>>> and functions.sh under /usr/lib/sqm and added simple_WIP4cake.qos, = these >>>> changes should be confined to simple_WIP4cake (the one extra = function in >>>> functions.sh is only called by simple_WIP4cake and hence things = should >>>> work for you as before)). >>>> I would love to see wether this can be used to set up cake on >>>> eth0, so I would like to ask for permission to test (for all I know = a >>>> reboot might be required, so this only works if you are near that = box and >>>> there is nothing important using it right now). >>>>=20 >>>> Best Regards >>>> Sebastian >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> This also means I would love experienced testers for the latest >>>>>> sqm-scripts changes... >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Best Regards >>>>>> Sebastian >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> At the moment I am trying to fix snmpd (massive upgrade + musl >>>>>>> support) and won't be touching that box for a while. It IS a = dynamic >>>>>>> ipv6 address.... >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Can anyone here push out tc-adv, kmod-* into openwrt's routing = repo? >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Sebastian Moeller = >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi All, >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> I just committed a few cake related changes to luci-app-sqm and >>>>>>>> sqm-scripts in ceropackages 3.10. Mainly it is about passing = link >>>>>>>> layer and numeric overhead on to cake (if selected as qdisc), = but it >>>>>>>> also passed the two string fields ion the GUI aptly named = =93Advanced >>>>>>>> option string to pass to the [ingress|egress} queueing = disciplines; >>>>>>>> no error checking, use very carefully.=94 to the = [ingress|egress] cake >>>>>>>> instances. This should be helpful in testing cake options under >>>>>>>> openwrt builds. BUT this is totally untested, as I have not = managed >>>>>>>> to build cake locally let alone install it. So please, anybody, >>>>>>>> please test the changes and report failure and/or success back. = Thank >>>>>>>> you very much in advance. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Best Regards >>>>>>>> Sebastian > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel