From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-ot1-x336.google.com (mail-ot1-x336.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::336])
 (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 6C0A13CB35
 for <ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Thu,  8 Aug 2019 12:17:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-x336.google.com with SMTP id j11so20423856otp.10
 for <ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net>; Thu, 08 Aug 2019 09:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
 h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=JJxYyVwdcpJCh5zveAGKFMRy19+2wuIf2a+YQvH2Ofc=;
 b=T2lqbuTkIjCZLPthizAvCM8ABoNBaUI09RlPTaJwgoiNAOKB7xu6XbG/rN/UtO2HJe
 102h7JvWyWyBNF9GjgJ9qtbuKVEv5WLRRiq+LZN6WMZGvy0QRgqqNVJGeEy9wqbUnQCQ
 kshMPssoAdAEydvBHnTtKB2kKP03HYkS6yxObGenFG8rDdv53P3sYRoeR+RsgJLVG5O6
 3F4Yo4fvypiw0G2OzG5BO0paiTmaQYrH1Dmhyfz5hMBhMxgo0YaQi2DNLITxB1+FZd2y
 N3OeXJMgPS1Q5byc06nSekEsJplFltzxJHexrMgRbF3JHDT6Qs+Opd3KfDa6fSntY9Zn
 iXNA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=JJxYyVwdcpJCh5zveAGKFMRy19+2wuIf2a+YQvH2Ofc=;
 b=CH24YP//HNPO367Sj1x15afV2i11TUjf+fNK210OMIpK6OmV2dm6kwFda+BAc7/yXR
 jenYP7rAVKI2nUqB/M3w05cCdpA3v4+tKbM/ChZDvUN3aZWe/eqyz77ODBDkQePh8ZCq
 oY9i7SsVnDYgpQ8xpOR2vAhMU9OODWLqS5GvHQ7zivaZqC9XW4mtcEwwwiHZH+4UCGZn
 U6Q4B6zz6SeZaEpKYh27y0E9UqvUOSQJ7fP+4eC3DtTCbwBlB4QYi+Zvwa23sdoKlR7w
 G1FoCe7tueZ9/3dPkN+VBxTqdLOozvctWjIkcwUALq49D8JiwAWkuDn+t2vt2xEDtUU8
 E7zw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV2TgRg9af3Z+L2uT0ujn94X5uSRCTHLfvYVXhGxdFxU+rEL/e/
 PmTfYA7loAx/kwLJSHHs97m5PEBEDdgy1lTu2N7HmObX16c=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzC4arR5x2epwpyU/Q8cNj+llOOU3UOz8PYZR8uYe55xqErOU6NNAAhsiC8s3YjUv1WmU2imKdDPQ2worNaGk0=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:9d42:: with SMTP id k2mr16729786iok.45.1565281052572; 
 Thu, 08 Aug 2019 09:17:32 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 09:17:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CAA93jw6RAfsnL0yfq1J_zewrVHvR9QNYG7Yk_KGnDxtsS1oX9w@mail.gmail.com>
To: ECN-Sane <ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: [Ecn-sane] sce ramp vs threshold
X-BeenThere: ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of explicit congestion notification's impact on the
 Internet <ecn-sane.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/ecn-sane>,
 <mailto:ecn-sane-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/ecn-sane>
List-Post: <mailto:ecn-sane@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:ecn-sane-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/ecn-sane>,
 <mailto:ecn-sane-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2019 16:17:33 -0000

My original understanding of sce was that a threshold function
sufficed for fq, and a ramp was needed for
single queues. Is that still the case?

I *reallly* want to see the cpu overhead of this stuff on cheap
hardware, so I'm fiddling with this:

https://github.com/dtaht/fq_codel_fast/commit/9e6ab76c81fd26f22806f19476481=
a1b92c9703e

--=20

Dave T=C3=A4ht
CTO, TekLibre, LLC
http://www.teklibre.com
Tel: 1-831-205-9740