From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f175.google.com (mail-wi0-f175.google.com [209.85.212.175]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5062921F095 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 16:49:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wibhm2 with SMTP id hm2so4471720wib.10 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 16:49:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SEEDaGxB4JK1qT/swc/6JAJ2Ihc73A5oEBpqin4l90k=; b=AJFfQ36R5tHluyZngXbqSLrQ/ln7Cjoi54dOIqCJEXHFybYL4fGoCDciEn0JVGix8v c7x/ww85B0+wTaiYijvlOqPrXH8wr6rDi/vDgAfI9bWgd1aUPk1HKrTa0gRWanafhX92 YCemUeCZe+ZBlVzJBHapgC9g2e0F4wee1wbwyt/K7/Uk3k3OAavWXlxW2IZleR7vMDSk Bxzp5IM2BnPeDI3xpYtxGgWqg6zKCLOeKogVORhTMj95ZflRUG7217Jl/aeav4E0ltMW atdGCVwE/wPxySTx6sVEueIa/gyqkzJLF0gfDGXmKwtAKQP2gZLUE2fzsjcS4iypuPu9 OgmA== Received: by 10.180.88.102 with SMTP id bf6mr46062633wib.4.1342050596415; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 16:49:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.28.88.151] ([74.125.122.49]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id bc2sm8775191wib.0.2012.07.11.16.49.54 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 11 Jul 2012 16:49:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Eric Dumazet To: Rick Jones In-Reply-To: <4FFDC985.6050805@hp.com> References: <1340945457.29822.7.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <1341396687.2583.1757.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <20120709.000834.1182150057463599677.davem@davemloft.net> <1341845722.3265.3065.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <1341933215.3265.5476.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <1342019518.3265.8116.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <4FFDC985.6050805@hp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 01:49:52 +0200 Message-ID: <1342050592.3265.8195.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: nanditad@google.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, mattmathis@google.com, codel@lists.bufferbloat.net, ncardwell@google.com, David Miller Subject: Re: [Codel] [RFC PATCH v2] tcp: TCP Small Queues X-BeenThere: codel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: CoDel AQM discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 23:49:58 -0000 On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 11:44 -0700, Rick Jones wrote: > On 07/11/2012 08:11 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > > Some bench results about the choice of 128KB being the default value: > > What were the starting/baseline figures? > > > > > Tests using a single TCP flow. > > > > Tests on 10Gbit links : > > > > > > echo 16384 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_limit_output_bytes > > OMNI Send TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to 192.168.99.2 (192.168.99.2) port 0 AF_INET > > tcpi_rto 201000 tcpi_ato 0 tcpi_pmtu 1500 tcpi_rcv_ssthresh 14600 > > tcpi_rtt 1875 tcpi_rttvar 750 tcpi_snd_ssthresh 16 tpci_snd_cwnd 79 > > tcpi_reordering 53 tcpi_total_retrans 0 > > Local Local Local Elapsed Throughput Throughput Local Local Remote Remote Local Remote Service > > Send Socket Send Socket Send Time Units CPU CPU CPU CPU Service Service Demand > > Size Size Size (sec) Util Util Util Util Demand Demand Units > > Final Final % Method % Method > > 392360 392360 16384 20.00 1389.53 10^6bits/s 0.52 S 4.30 S 0.737 1.014 usec/KB > > By the way, that double reporting of the local socket send size is fixed in: > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > r516 | raj | 2012-01-05 15:48:52 -0800 (Thu, 05 Jan 2012) | 1 line > > report the rsr_size_end in an omni stream test rather than a copy of the > lss_size_end > > of netperf and later. Also, any idea why the local socket send size got > so much larger with 1GbE than 10 GbE at that setting of > tcp_limit_output_bytes? The 10Gb receiver is a net-next kernel, but the 1Gb receiver is a 2.6.38 ubuntu kernel. They probably have very different TCP behavior.