Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andy Furniss <adf.lists@gmail.com>
To: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
Cc: "lartc@vger.kernel.org" <lartc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Alan Goodman <notifications@yescomputersolutions.com>,
	"cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net"
	<cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Correctly calculating overheads on unknown connections
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 10:17:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54228C40.4050605@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F56C7E65-4C82-4C78-9CF1-398A008530FA@gmx.de>

Sebastian Moeller wrote:

> Thanks for sharing your test case; I can repeat these results
> exactly on my machines (I also tried htb instead hfsc for fun: same
> result as to be expected see below). Looking back at
> http://lxr.free-electrons.com/ident?i=qdisc_pkt_len_init (line
> 2731):
>
> qdisc_skb_cb(skb)->pkt_len += (gso_segs - 1) * hdr_len ;
>
> I begin to realize this function is not responsible for adding
> single wire packet’s ethernet header, but for figuring out in how
> many on-the-wire packets to chop down a GSO packet , and add the
> header overhead for the additional wire packets, I had completely
> looked over the (gso-segs - 1) part, oops.

Glad it helped - I know from trying, and giving up, how hard/error prone
reading kernel code can be :-)

>
> @cerowrt-devel: everyone using link layer ATM you might want to try
> to reduce the the per packet overhead by 14… (but please test)

Maybe you mean overhead calculated by a script?

Just to be clear, I expect that wrt would be shaping on ppp, so you
don't need to take 14 if that's the case.


> So I stand corrected, you are right, tic’s stab automatically adds
> the ethernet header. So I am off to repeat my netperf-wrapper tests
> right now again with overhead of 30 instead of 44, again these tests
> confirm your observation. Interestingly, it seems netperf-wrapper’s
> RRUL test really is suited to figure out the overhead: while shaping
> to 100% of line rate (on ADSL2+ where line rate rate is the net line
> rate (after FEC)) specifying too small an overhead the ICMP latency
> plot shows larger deviations from the expected unload RTT plus 10ms.
> Too large an overhead however just decreases the good put bait while
> leaving the latency well under control.

I wouldn't word it like "stab adds ..." This is nothing to do with stab
really - just the only length stab knows is skb->len and that means
different things on different interfaces because of how the kernel works.

(I haven't retested all this, but I doubt it's changed)

On ppp skb->len = ip len

On eth skb->len = ip len + 14

On vlan skb->len = ip len + 18

If you ran my script on various interfaces without stab I expect you
would still be able to see the difference - everyone who does any tc on
eth gets shaping with ip+14 sized packets.

Even without tc involved I think you could see the difference looking at
ip -s ls xxxx type stats on different interfaces.


  reply	other threads:[~2014-09-24  9:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <541C9527.1070105@yescomputersolutions.com>
     [not found] ` <541DA8B5.70701@gmail.com>
2014-09-20 17:55   ` Dave Taht
2014-09-20 22:29     ` Andy Furniss
2014-09-21 18:35     ` Sebastian Moeller
     [not found]       ` <CAK1m8mPBWyg-sR-ekZGUhsOG-0HoZd3eJ-Q6HJpSLyN-J90kHg@mail.gmail.com>
2014-09-21 21:40         ` Alan Goodman
2014-09-22  9:05         ` Sebastian Moeller
2014-09-22 10:01       ` Andy Furniss
2014-09-22 10:20         ` Sebastian Moeller
2014-09-22 13:09       ` Alan Goodman
2014-09-22 19:52         ` Sebastian Moeller
2014-09-22 23:02           ` Alan Goodman
2014-09-23  9:32             ` Sebastian Moeller
2014-09-23 15:10               ` Andy Furniss
2014-09-23 17:47                 ` Sebastian Moeller
2014-09-23 19:05                   ` Andy Furniss
2014-09-23 22:16                     ` Sebastian Moeller
2014-09-24  9:17                       ` Andy Furniss [this message]
2014-09-24 16:23                         ` Sebastian Moeller
2014-09-24 22:48                           ` Andy Furniss

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/cerowrt-devel.lists.bufferbloat.net/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=54228C40.4050605@gmail.com \
    --to=adf.lists@gmail.com \
    --cc=cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    --cc=lartc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=moeller0@gmx.de \
    --cc=notifications@yescomputersolutions.com \
    /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