From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3ED621F996 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 22:50:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id A113EA1; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 07:50:02 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1435384202; bh=t/sTTunkbSGVBdqEOLhYf8O0nidia4ZDsPRRN7OV24c=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=TgeGB3kztGkXsLKYMzXKXGlNoYURb9IOsKWU/1G406B3hamOYe2VEY/VD0X5ob+Rd ZLUB8FJU8EAitP37JsZ68Ooy3BlOw66fLb0Rt/4NDrXkuhKdsA7mqRsEDFMaS7VT3e Phv56+KtoHEr5dQyWZ8wNUMZknYNmSllY1q0g5do= Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C8939F; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 07:50:02 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 07:50:02 +0200 (CEST) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: Dave Taht In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <43D5C3CE-F1F4-4BA5-AEB9-55348661C7BA@gmx.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] performance numbers from WRT1200AC (Re: 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: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 05:50:34 -0000 On Fri, 26 Jun 2015, Dave Taht wrote: > your results are showing basically tail drop behavior. Although I > would have expected intrinsic delay on the link to crack 100mbits on > the rrul test, not 20ms (which is still high), and you only hit 7 on > the single threaded tcp up test, based on what I saw in the driver. > > turn off sqm, stay at 100mbit, let fq_codel ride, try the rrul_50_up > test. Also do a capture to see if CE was ever exerted. http://swm.pp.se/aqm/rrul_50_up-2015-06-27T072819.166452.iperf3_150626_9_100M.flent.gz I have a capture of this as well, it's 1.5gigs. It has lots of mentions of ECT(0) but 0 mention of ECT(1). TOS should be 0x3 when the EC=1 ? I see no such packets. All the packets are 0x2. http://swm.pp.se/aqm/rrul_50up-100M.pcap.bz2 I went back to gig and set SQM to 50 megabit/s bidirectional and looking at tc qdisc -s eth0 I see ecn_mark 10339 on a single queue, none of the others have non-zero ecn_mark. > I do not know why my linksys ac1200 build does not work. I generally > suspect it is because my big build server is getting ancient. Can you > send me your .config file for openwrt? http://swm.pp.se/aqm/wrt1200ac.config This was my first try, I haven't fine tuned it yet, but it works (boots and moves packets anyway :P ) > It would be VERY helpful if you pulled from ceropackages-3.14, and > added and built kmod-sched-cake and tc-adv and switched to using the > ceropackages feed also for luci-app-sqm and sqm-scripts. There are a > couple people here that would probably leap on that! :) I will give it a go in the next few days. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se