* CCID 3 bounded by OS scheduling granularity
@ 2007-01-22 14:24 Gerrit Renker
2007-03-06 2:30 ` Ian McDonald
2007-03-06 9:52 ` Gerrit Renker
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Gerrit Renker @ 2007-01-22 14:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dccp
I have performed experiments which confirm that
1) when t_ipi < t_gran, the transmit rate is effectively out of control
2) when t_ipi > t_gran, the actual transmit rate is about a factor of 3
higher than s/t_ipi would permit.
http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gerrit/dccp/docs/packet_scheduling/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: CCID 3 bounded by OS scheduling granularity
2007-01-22 14:24 CCID 3 bounded by OS scheduling granularity Gerrit Renker
@ 2007-03-06 2:30 ` Ian McDonald
2007-03-06 9:52 ` Gerrit Renker
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Ian McDonald @ 2007-03-06 2:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dccp
On 1/23/07, Gerrit Renker <gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk> wrote:
> I have performed experiments which confirm that
>
> 1) when t_ipi < t_gran, the transmit rate is effectively out of control
> 2) when t_ipi > t_gran, the actual transmit rate is about a factor of 3
> higher than s/t_ipi would permit.
>
> http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gerrit/dccp/docs/packet_scheduling/
I've been going over this and wonder if you ever got to the bottom of
it by instrumenting it or similar as it doesn't make sense to me....
We add t_ipi to t_nom after each packet so even coarse grained
scheduling shouldn't do this.
Ian
--
Web: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4
Blog: http://iansblog.jandi.co.nz
WAND Network Research Group
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: CCID 3 bounded by OS scheduling granularity
2007-01-22 14:24 CCID 3 bounded by OS scheduling granularity Gerrit Renker
2007-03-06 2:30 ` Ian McDonald
@ 2007-03-06 9:52 ` Gerrit Renker
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Gerrit Renker @ 2007-03-06 9:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dccp
| > I have performed experiments which confirm that
| >
| > 1) when t_ipi < t_gran, the transmit rate is effectively out of control
| > 2) when t_ipi > t_gran, the actual transmit rate is about a factor of 3
| > higher than s/t_ipi would permit.
| >
| > http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gerrit/dccp/docs/packet_scheduling/
|
| I've been going over this and wonder if you ever got to the bottom of
| it by instrumenting it or similar as it doesn't make sense to me....
| We add t_ipi to t_nom after each packet so even coarse grained
| scheduling shouldn't do this.
The graphs on that web page are actually the result of instrumenting the kernel.
There are further instrumentation tests, the results of which are on
http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gerrit/dccp/docs/impact_of_tx_queue_lenghts/
The problem is not in adding t_ipi, but rather in schedule_timeout which works
at HZ granularity.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-03-06 9:52 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-01-22 14:24 CCID 3 bounded by OS scheduling granularity Gerrit Renker
2007-03-06 2:30 ` Ian McDonald
2007-03-06 9:52 ` Gerrit Renker
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox