From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: mail.toke.dk; dkim=pass header.d=toke.dk; arc=none (Message is not ARC signed); dmarc=pass (Used From Domain Record) header.from=toke.dk policy.dmarc=reject From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1767378117; bh=0qL9d4flsy6MPMJtU1dwJNxG2o1/RCJhPWeCuz54prY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=sQbdop9aU/K4365xC24wFeBLe6MKEk3gRCny809JX3MhRJKveGt5IqwELi2h0Jx0y lRFEy5JkkxdfJBI5rqn1oCfUG3nRWBW12bZr836ZnUiI3IQ+xCGAfRNYllYEHlltuD yWOKCThGTnDvsKABGifdVsPi7bh0N2gmQzSF4yi6WW2bf0A/V+8iG7Zuwri4RAVY3P XBEjcvBkOpB+S4yFv6mMS/X9Y9u9gRh4aZZj+PcvrxAn5YtSmIdDMG57RfiXVoj1ww QGsKQqpwdeJIiz7P1Qocew1bEv4P7qNDvd2fZQ+pztk1PrymGRglBXcS7sLrvnycMw H5PvK9YEFAd5Q== To: David Lang , Colin_Higbie Cc: "starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net" In-Reply-To: References: <176388152155.1303.12028700061090443748@gauss> Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2026 19:21:56 +0100 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87o6nbri2j.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Message-ID-Hash: WMXWGOEWTKJXC2GA5H2W77XPD4PALHVR X-Message-ID-Hash: WMXWGOEWTKJXC2GA5H2W77XPD4PALHVR X-MailFrom: toke@toke.dk X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list Subject: [Starlink] Re: Bufferbloat cure question List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: David Lang via Starlink writes: > Colin_Higbie wrote: > >> At 300Mbps or higher, bufferbloat and jitter skyrocket to hundreds of ms, much >> worse than not using CAKE at all. I can see one of the 4 router CPU cores >> spikes to 100% at those transfer rates whenever I don't limit bandwidth to >> something below 280Mbps. > > I know I've seen some patches going past in the last couple of months to let > cake use more than one CPU, so you may want to look at testing those. The current version of those patches are here: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/toke/linux.git/log/?h=mq-cake-sub-qdisc Testing very welcome! I'm planning to resubmit them for upstream inclusion on Monday :) -Toke