Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Correct syntax for cake commands and atm issues.

[Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>]

enabled 1

is needed

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>
>
> On 10/07/15 19:46, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
>>
>> Hi Fred,
>>
>> your results seem to indicate that cake is not active at all, as the
>> latency under load is abysmal (a quick check is to look at the median in
>> relation to the min and the 90% number, in your examples all of these are
>> terrible). Could you please post the result of the following commands on
>> your router:
>> 1) cat /etc/config/sqm
>
> config queue 'eth1'
>     option qdisc 'fq_codel'
>     option script 'simple.qos'
>     option qdisc_advanced '0'
>     option linklayer 'none'
>     option enabled '0'
>     option interface 'eth1'
>     option download '0'
>     option upload '0'
>
>
>> 2) tc -d qdisc
>
> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev eth0 root refcnt 2 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
> target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev eth1 root refcnt 2 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
> target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
> qdisc mq 0: dev wlan1 root
> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan1 parent :1 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
> target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan1 parent :2 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
> target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan1 parent :3 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
> target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan1 parent :4 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
> target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
> qdisc mq 0: dev wlan0 root
> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan0 parent :1 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
> target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan0 parent :2 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
> target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan0 parent :3 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
> target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
> qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan0 parent :4 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
> target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
> qdisc cake 8002: dev pppoe-wan root refcnt 2 bandwidth 850Kbit besteffort
> flows raw
> qdisc ingress ffff: dev pppoe-wan parent ffff:fff1 ----------------
> qdisc cake 8001: dev ifb4pppoe-wan root refcnt 2 bandwidth 11500Kbit
> besteffort flows atm overhead 40
>
>> 3) tc -d class show dev pppoe-wan
>
> class cake 8002:2fa parent 8002:
>
>
>> 4) tc -d class show dev ifb4pppoe-wqn
>
>
> class cake 8001:6e parent 8001:
>>
>> 5) /etc/init.d/sqm stop
>
> SQM: Trying to start/stop SQM on all interfaces.
> SQM: run.sh stop
> SQM: /usr/lib/sqm/run.sh SQM for interface eth1 is not enabled, skipping
> over...
>>
>> 6) /etc/init.d/sqm start
>
> /etc/init.d/sqm start
> SQM: Trying to start/stop SQM on all interfaces.
> SQM: /usr/lib/sqm/run.sh SQM for interface eth1 is not enabled, skipping
> over...
>
>>
>> hopefully these give some insight what might have happened.
>>
>> And finally I would love to learn the output of:
>> sh betterspeedtest.sh -4 -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -t 150 -p
>> netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -n 4 ; sh netperfrunner.sh -4 -H
>> netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -t 150 -p netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -n 4
>
>
> betterspeedtest.sh not installed
>
> sh betterspeedtest.sh -4 -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.ne
> t -t 150 -p netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -n 4 ; sh netperfrunner.sh -4 -H
> netperf-
> eu.bufferbloat.net -t 150 -p netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -n 4
> sh: can't open 'betterspeedtest.sh'
> 2015-07-10 20:10:55 Testing netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) with 4 streams
> down and up while pinging netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net. Takes about 150
> seconds.
>  Download:  6.8 Mbps
>    Upload:  0.59 Mbps
>   Latency: (in msec, 152 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
>       Min: 73.911
>     10pct: 232.211
>    Median: 308.556
>       Avg: 305.686
>     90pct: 376.183
>       Max: 412.553
>
>
>>
>>
>> Many Thanks & Best Regards
>>         Sebastian
>>
>> On Jul 10, 2015, at 20:25 , Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
>>
>>> By your command
>>> Rebooted to rerun qdisc script, rather than changing qdiscs from the
>>> command-line, so suboptimal process as end-point changed.
>>>
>>> script configuring qdiscs and overhead 40 on
>>>
>>> sh netperfrunner.sh -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -p 2.96.48.1
>>> 2015-07-10 18:22:08 Testing netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) with 4
>>> streams down and up while pinging 2.96.48.1. Takes about 60 seconds.
>>> Download:  6.73 Mbps
>>>    Upload:  0.58 Mbps
>>>   Latency: (in msec, 62 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
>>>       Min: 24.094
>>>     10pct: 172.654
>>>    Median: 260.563
>>>       Avg: 253.580
>>>     90pct: 330.003
>>>       Max: 411.145
>>>
>>> script configuring qdiscs on flows raw
>>>
>>> sh netperfrunner.sh -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -p
>>> 78.145.32.1
>>> 2015-07-10 18:49:21 Testing netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) with 4
>>> streams down and up while pinging 78.145.32.1. Takes about 60 seconds.
>>> Download:  6.75 Mbps
>>>    Upload:  0.59 Mbps
>>>   Latency: (in msec, 59 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
>>>       Min: 23.605
>>>     10pct: 169.789
>>>    Median: 282.155
>>>       Avg: 267.099
>>>     90pct: 333.283
>>>       Max: 376.509
>>>
>>> script configuring qdiscs and overhead 36 on
>>>
>>> sh netperfrunner.sh -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -p
>>> 80.44.96.1
>>> 2015-07-10 19:20:18 Testing netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) with 4
>>> streams down and up while pinging 80.44.96.1. Takes about 60 seconds.
>>> Download:  6.56 Mbps
>>>    Upload:  0.59 Mbps
>>>   Latency: (in msec, 62 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
>>>       Min: 22.975
>>>     10pct: 195.473
>>>    Median: 281.756
>>>       Avg: 271.609
>>>     90pct: 342.130
>>>       Max: 398.573
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/07/15 16:19, Alan Jenkins wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm glad to hear there's a working version (even if it's not in the
>>>> current build :).
>>>>
>>>> Do you have measurable improvements with overhead configured (v.s.
>>>> unconfigured)?
>>>>
>>>> I've used netperfrunner from CeroWrtScripts, e.g.
>>>>
>>>> sh netperfrunner.sh -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -p $ISP_ROUTER
>>>>
>>>> I believe accounting for overhead helps on this two-way test, because a)
>>>> it saturates the uplink b) about half that bandwidth is tiny ack packets
>>>> (depending on bandwidth asymmetry).  And small packets have proportionally
>>>> high overhead.
>>>>
>>>> (But it seems to only make a small difference for me, which always
>>>> surprises Seb).
>>>>
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>> On 10/07/15 15:52, Fred Stratton wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> You are absolutely correct.
>>>>>
>>>>> I tried both a numeric overhead value, and alternatively 'pppoe-vcmux'
>>>>> and 'ether-fcs' in the build I crafted based on r46006, which is lupin
>>>>> undeclared version 2. Everything works as stated.
>>>>>
>>>>> On lupin undeclared version 4, the current release based on r46117, the
>>>>> values were not recognised.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>> I had cake running on a Lantiq ADSL gateway running the same r46006
>>>>> build. Unfortunately this was bricked by attempts to get homenet
>>>>> working, so I have nothing to report about gateway usage at present.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/07/15 13:57, Jonathan Morton wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're already using correct syntax - I've written it to be quite
>>>>>> lenient and use sensible defaults for missing information. There are
>>>>>> several sets of keywords and parameters which are mutually orthogonal,
>>>>>> and don't depend on each other, so "besteffort" has nothing to do with
>>>>>> "overhead" or "atm".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's probably happening is that you're using a slightly old version
>>>>>> of the cake kernel module which lacks the overhead parameter entirely,
>>>>>> but a more up to date tc which does support it. We've seen this
>>>>>> combination crop up ourselves recently.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Jonathan Morton
>>>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel



-- 
Dave Täht
worldwide bufferbloat report:
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat
And:
What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone?
https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast