From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-x233.google.com (mail-oi0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::233]) (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 DC30F3B25E; Mon, 16 May 2016 04:26:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x233.google.com with SMTP id v145so257308136oie.0; Mon, 16 May 2016 01:26:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=QSy73lF17dm5vgiPgieZwU9RnA+wnRAjtWS8VwgdYUg=; b=rHngr9I1PRDfYxdlvN+4EAanhwI67PKrUqYceCqCRgH8c2EazrAgRdVhieC+xo/3ds pRtdh4e8CjCLAecZE2xSXw1+NIlwYoq0TuRoGEYx9nElDf1WKUUdePdMyHJUlapN08Xq o7HaDcFLvHVWlHu0++gxeap1As/2IXQ6iqL11QTZlXUnG4pDOHBdbX+iiPv7ifIPQREg lM/uIbDzBRMfLZGF58DPhBKqIcUurJr1QgUnWwsqVDt/bF2QzjeVteBwtVf7oam1J4Sp boADR2hMRoWTnoQpbrh7LFSjhqAnJRg4+Z3pOiexhKyDYiy2wk0Mc63Pzqh6LkQB7eFX 07iQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=QSy73lF17dm5vgiPgieZwU9RnA+wnRAjtWS8VwgdYUg=; b=dZupO+s2ZHJL9JGI9TIAPX6u6kqlLnMmecnRcJebkwLob36N4k3Q3RmFlFeR78zBic 5nEfRjDBhln7JZaB4BxiTuCzTKgOzqqzgnH6t7LvFnVJwvc4ujsO1eT4UOuQqbtiKcTg H2R/+cwZcxz/9FLLwgHWtu47ikWabxHK3cbft7PBgnP5F8pLJfON9RedUKf9u3xyV8Ok htViuIAVE8xvGarvSjkIWVQf4nK5CkYWysztkUr2KDsRxpFUstObSlQu38XcsfHwtKP7 2Xc9kF+HG2iELuZ/5NG8M7akZkuTr887TsqB/+3Y3/AGYbX43S0ID5/Ek5Fgp1s5z7b8 HSVw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXV2YGhXGA96sjZYgOX1o5DCQZkIpa/RkWvEJWEU5aQ2HhIEhD5TM5GssnQbuKIzboMtQf1fVw3GRGawQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.157.15.196 with SMTP id m4mr8883308otd.162.1463387176406; Mon, 16 May 2016 01:26:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.252.9 with HTTP; Mon, 16 May 2016 01:26:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1462201620.5535.250.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> <1462205669.5535.254.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> <1462464776.13075.18.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> <1462476207.13075.20.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> <20160506114243.4eb4f95e@redhat.com> <20160506144740.210901f5@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 11:26:16 +0300 Message-ID: From: Roman Yeryomin To: David Lang Cc: Dave Taht , make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net, =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= , ath10k , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "codel@lists.bufferbloat.net" , OpenWrt Development List , Felix Fietkau Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] OpenWRT wrong adjustment of fq_codel defaults (Was: [Codel] fq_codel_drop vs a udp flood) X-BeenThere: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 08:26:17 -0000 On 16 May 2016 at 11:12, David Lang wrote: > On Mon, 16 May 2016, Roman Yeryomin wrote: > >> On 6 May 2016 at 22:43, Dave Taht wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Roman Yeryomin >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 6 May 2016 at 21:43, Roman Yeryomin wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 6 May 2016 at 15:47, Jesper Dangaard Brouer >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >> >>> That is too low a limit, also, for normal use. And: >>> for the purpose of this particular UDP test, flows 16 is ok, but not >>> ideal. >> >> >> I played with different combinations, it doesn't make any >> (significant) difference: 20-30Mbps, not more. >> What numbers would you propose? > > > How many different flows did you have going at once? I believe that the > reason for higher numbers isn't for throughput, but to allow for more flows > to be isolated from each other. If you have too few buckets, different flows > will end up being combined into one bucket so that one will affect the other > more. I'm testing with one flow, I never saw bigger performance with more flows (e.g. -P8 to iperf3). Regards, Roman