From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk1-x735.google.com (mail-qk1-x735.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::735]) (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 7B6743BA8E; Thu, 6 Sep 2018 14:02:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x735.google.com with SMTP id z125-v6so7937773qkb.12; Thu, 06 Sep 2018 11:02:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=sq4Pf/SJ62GINolaIbYw2WP7sN+k29oBJO4UUcjoqk4=; b=gNxHbdRQ1r0cDh+6WndPcFwzgCPEVAM0u3F5vKZEAyVTRyJPwNlRbRzaBgApRhye7j KgJHofmjRujE9E8mZnVZQET/N7pe8Bj6LO4/oSNueezirR4HZ9+n0UjHR1TP/3JoWEGy SBIJobGDRqbiYvJdvZjUH+P7rIXcyojvFWO1AH02GlZehqXbKWD8DSXNTasPxbPNo+3t Kkz2W994PVpDX8fjtGMSM6nuSOt15zWbxcp8sr/En5YPQUVDe7bqOpRQaU3ca3TdR7tR 6X0skMo/NjlH3c1IPjOb7Svp5PCEtBnMjoWdlqUe4aTgVP8EmHX6lbGeyahKuaaLhX3C IYbg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=sq4Pf/SJ62GINolaIbYw2WP7sN+k29oBJO4UUcjoqk4=; b=IZvYfBjeoWzeyGMw/DCs5n2pGT0uKZZ2GJ6zhdpe3c+XIdxeW8DI28L1AiUu4H82gj NGK0taealfatrsS1FAwKhHzMIyjTaSTW5DaH27rnDL5PPmjSifrYAZBqn0pT/+6pBPf9 10Vw2F2jlz1MejVnDIfyE6FiVn7vL+faWX2R1T5almu/QVPn6BiBbcxLGWIxkdkfdPv0 nWHS4baMkajqayOgpkz6tzQezTPhU2I7Gz1dd05HML72wJmRM2KGSAhUw+gOXrf77sFQ iujDf3Z+yG2pc4RQhH72o5rWujhooLtcICcqUE440bk3FUIIqfiI2PcoGstwiOvrNTrl zqQQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51BMQszOCNgUue2FFnNjKboG45mrfTLbkd/vU/dsJb1lNUaJc5fR Ff6iBMzf6nzaHBK+/SrtmMmHo/mtLVYsnakaydHnp5l2 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdY1MJlv8vGrbGt30mmtwWeth8bDKcpU2hMnty2J3yCxeTi59IAb4ejDbg7nK3qjpdbdBpy3o6dNiO75ThrthaY= X-Received: by 2002:a37:c845:: with SMTP id c66-v6mr2851166qkj.65.1536256971957; Thu, 06 Sep 2018 11:02:51 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1D2079D5-3BA8-4968-AD5A-990AFA3A7698@heistp.net> In-Reply-To: <1D2079D5-3BA8-4968-AD5A-990AFA3A7698@heistp.net> From: Dave Taht Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 11:03:44 -0700 Message-ID: To: Pete Heist Cc: Cake List , cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Cake] apu2 sqm/htb issue + a minor win for speeding up fq_codel itself X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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: Thu, 06 Sep 2018 18:02:52 -0000 I put a bug here. Someone with a non apu product struggling with shaping (edgerouter? omnia?) https://github.com/tohojo/sqm-scripts/issues/71 On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 10:51 AM Pete Heist wrote: > > Cool, well I for one would like to see the APU be able to handle higher s= peeds, for FreeNet=E2=80=99s backhaul, at least. Although frankly, I=E2=80= =99ve not definitively witnessed any significant bloat in their backhaul ye= t with production traffic. > > A good number of their routers are still ALIX (https://www.pcengines.ch/a= lix2d2.htm), all of which are on an upgrade list. These don=E2=80=99t do hf= sc + sfq on kernel 2.6.26 much beyond about 70 Mbit. Not a problem to focus= on=E2=80=A6 :) > > On Sep 4, 2018, at 11:16 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > > my guess is that burst and cburst should scale roughly as a function > of the bytes that can fit into 1ms. > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 2:14 PM Dave Taht wrote: > > > making htb's cburst and burst parameters 64k gets the APU2 up to > where it can shape 900mbits. 3 ksoftirq handlers start getting cpu > time, and we end up 54% idle to achiefe that. > > I should really go around running my own old code. I was deeply > involved in sqm when we still had to run at sub 200mbit levels. since > then it's been > mostly tbf (burst 64k) + fq_codel or cake, and me ignoring various bug > reports about it not scaling well enough at higher rates. > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 12:59 PM Dave Taht wrote: > > > less than scientifically (via monitoring top) - on the apu2 > > 100Mbit sqm (htb + fq_codel) > > fq_codel_mainline | fq_codel_fast > idle 78.8 | 83.5 | > si 20 | 16.1 | > > Yea! But: > > 900Mbit sqm (htb + fq_codel) > > fq_codel_mainline | fq_codel_fast > idle 74.4 | 74.4 | > si 25 | 25.1 | > > Here: completely bottlenecked on ksoftirqd - and I only get 340Mbits > out of the 900mbit setting. quantum 96k and burst of 15000. Haven't > fiddled with higher values yet... > > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-669-226-2619