From: jamal <hadi@cyberus.ca>
To: Tom Herbert <therbert@google.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/9] bql: Byte Queue Limits
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2011 09:06:24 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1312808784.17202.39.camel@mojatatu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1108072129010.13386@pokey.mtv.corp.google.com>
Hi Tom,
Where are the throughput numbers? I think the tps may be sufficient
proof point for latency.
No comment on the code but on the concept.
Essentially what you are implementing is two things in one:
- byte counting (instead of packet counting we use at that layer)
- pseudo active queue management
For wired connections I think the big deal is in improved
runtime memory saving (your perf numbers are kinda ok).
The challenge is going to be with wireless where the underlying
bandwidth changes (and therefore the optimal queue size varies
more frequently). The problem with active queue management is
getting the feedback loop to be more accurate and i think there
will be challenges with wired devices.
I notice that you dont have any wireless devices;
but it would be nice for someone to check this out on wireless.
CCing Johannes - maybe he has some insight.
cheers,
jamal
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-08 13:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-08 4:43 [RFC PATCH v2 0/9] bql: Byte Queue Limits Tom Herbert
2011-08-08 13:06 ` jamal [this message]
2011-08-08 13:18 ` Johannes Berg
2011-08-25 15:29 ` Tom Herbert
2011-08-25 20:23 ` jamal
2011-08-25 15:19 ` Tom Herbert
2011-08-08 15:40 ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-08-08 17:51 ` Tom Herbert
2011-08-08 17:55 ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-08-08 17:56 ` Tom Herbert
2011-08-08 18:01 ` Tom Herbert
2011-08-08 18:19 ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-08-09 7:41 ` David Miller
2011-08-09 8:06 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-08-09 14:54 ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-08-09 18:28 ` Tom Herbert
2011-08-12 18:20 ` Stephen Hemminger
2011-08-13 0:33 ` Tom Herbert
2011-08-13 0:38 ` Stephen Hemminger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1312808784.17202.39.camel@mojatatu \
--to=hadi@cyberus.ca \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jhs@mojatatu.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=therbert@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox