From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: [RFC] SFQ planned changes Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 01:14:58 +0100 Message-ID: <1325636098.30256.12.camel@edumazet-laptop> References: <1325385056.4174.51.camel@denise.theartistscloset.com> <21734335.uCtjXOcSpA@alaris> <1325587235.2320.37.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC> <1325595036.2320.43.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC> <1325606918.2320.84.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Michal =?UTF-8?Q?Kube=C4=8Dek?= , netdev@vger.kernel.org, "John A. Sullivan III" To: Dave Taht Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com ([209.85.212.174]:59194 "EHLO mail-wi0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754975Ab2ADAPD (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jan 2012 19:15:03 -0500 Received: by wibhm6 with SMTP id hm6so9532450wib.19 for ; Tue, 03 Jan 2012 16:15:02 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Le mercredi 04 janvier 2012 =C3=A0 00:57 +0100, Dave Taht a =C3=A9crit = : > On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Eric Dumazet = wrote: > > Here is the code I ran on my test server with 200 netperf TCP_STREA= M > > flows with pretty good results (each flow gets 0.5 % of bandwidth) >=20 > Can I encourage you to always simultaneously run a fping and/or a > netperf -t TCP_RR >=20 ping is pretty nice ;) # ping -c 20 192.168.20.112 PING 192.168.20.112 (192.168.20.112) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D1 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.251 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D2 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.123 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D3 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.124 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D4 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.108 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D5 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.131 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D6 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.126 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D7 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.156 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D8 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.123 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D9 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.111 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D10 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.129 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D11 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.112 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D12 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.138 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D13 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.118 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D14 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.119 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D15 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.121 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D16 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.125 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D17 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.128 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D18 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.108 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D19 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.149 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D20 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.126 ms --- 192.168.20.112 ping statistics --- 20 packets transmitted, 20 received, 0% packet loss, time 18999ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev =3D 0.108/0.131/0.251/0.031 ms > latency under load test when doing stuff like this? >=20 > The amount of backlogged bytes is rather impressive... 200 tcp flooding flows... thats pretty normal. If I add to this load a TCP_RR one I get : # netperf -H 192.168.20.110 -v 0 -l 10 -t TCP_RR TCP REQUEST/RESPONSE TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to 192.168.20.110 (192.168.20.110) port 0 AF_INET : demo 7606.18=20 If I stop the flood and start the TCP_RR alone : # netperf -H 192.168.20.110 -v 0 -l 10 -t TCP_RR TCP REQUEST/RESPONSE TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to 192.168.20.110 (192.168.20.110) port 0 AF_INET : demo 12031.39=20 And a ping on idle link : # ping -c 20 192.168.20.112 PING 192.168.20.112 (192.168.20.112) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D1 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.119 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D2 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.090 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D3 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.085 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D4 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.087 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D5 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.084 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D6 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.084 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D7 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.088 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D8 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.085 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D9 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.083 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D10 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.082 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D11 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.082 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D12 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.085 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D13 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.086 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D14 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.084 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D15 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.089 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D16 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.081 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D17 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.084 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D18 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.086 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D19 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.084 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.20.112: icmp_req=3D20 ttl=3D64 time=3D0.084 ms --- 192.168.20.112 ping statistics --- 20 packets transmitted, 20 received, 0% packet loss, time 19000ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev =3D 0.081/0.086/0.119/0.012 ms I can do a test on full Gigabit speed (removing the HTB) and 1000 flows and post results