Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> writes:

> Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> wrote:
>>> Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 10 August 2016 21:35:40 CEST, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>Wow, that *is* weird. It is good to see the tcp window changing on
>>>>>this set of data (it wasn't before), and CWRs, but... hmmm... SCIENCE.
>>>>>
>>>>>Enabling ecn on both sides will rule out some potential bugs.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, couldn't get ecn to work on the host I was using as the other endpoint on
>>>> that test. Will try with another box that's not on quite as ancient a kernel.
>>>> Was also planning to disable codel (by setting a very high target) to try to
>>>> narrow down the problem.
>>>
>>> OK, digging some more on this:
>>>
>>> I am seeing *no* drops by CoDel, and no backlog in the mac80211 softq
>>> layer either (or at most one or two packets when polling with a 1 sec
>>> interval). This is with one as well as with two flows.
>>
>> But there are tons of drops evident from the captures.
>
> Well the CoDel drop counter stays completely flat. There are cwnd
> reductions, yes, but are they drops? My thought was that they were
> retransmissions caused by OOO packets?

Here's the patch to expose the CoDel drop counter per flow, BTW. Can be
dropped into a LEDE build.

-Toke