From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Denys Fedoryshchenko" Subject: Re: testing crazy stuff with iproute2 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 01:44:17 +0200 Message-ID: <20071227233749.M11574@visp.net.lb> References: <20071226045037.M75814@visp.net.lb> <4774146D.1030502@gmail.com> <20071227212405.M87764@visp.net.lb> <20071227225455.GA6672@ami.dom.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Jarek Poplawski Return-path: Received: from usermail.globalproof.net ([194.146.153.18]:38529 "EHLO usermail.globalproof.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753355AbXL0Xyn (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Dec 2007 18:54:43 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20071227225455.GA6672@ami.dom.local> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 23:54:55 +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote > On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 11:25:53PM +0200, Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote: > > I will try to talk in lartc, about HTB i wrote another mail... > > It is not acting as TBF with burst, it is even acting weird. Probably it is > > bug, when traffic get "blocked" cause of burst. > > HTB was probably projected to be simple, so it has less knobs than > CBQ or TBF. But it shouldn't act weird, unless you do weird things... > E.g. what do you expect with 'rate 8bit'? I think, you should > firstly do some tests with different rates without touching cburst > or even quantum: HTB usually uses workable defaults if rates and > packet sizes are within some limits. End at the beginning I think > it's better to always use 'default' parameter with qdisc, and add > some class for this to verify all traffic is filtered as expected. It is just to make ceil thing there is no bandwidth available. I know that parents in theory must be equal or more than childs sum and etc. About strange cburst/burst i will explain in next part. > > > I will try to use lartc, if it is better to not "spam" my stuff here :-) > > Maybe you don't believe it, but I really knew much more about > properly setting HTB parameters 2 years ago, when I read lartc or > not worse our local linux networking news group than now - when, > this practical knowledge was mostly erased by some 'useless' inside details. For bandwidth sharing it is perfect, but i want just to make things, which i did with TBF - some time bursty speed, and then slow down to lower speed if customer is using too much. In theory it has to work like this, but in practice i am hitting wall. I tried it about 1 year ago, it was same thing, just with another conditions. Seems cburst/burst a bit different thing, just to make load on CPU by HTB less , at high speeds. > > > I didn't try yet PSPacer yet, as ESFQ things. If it is need i can do that and > > write feedback. I can use some of them in real environment after some pre- > > testing. > > It looked like very interesting, so I'm only a bit curious why so > quiet... On my experience people don't like much talking on mails, sending bug reports and etc. I know a lot of people who have kernel panic, oops issues, and who don't know what to do, just to blame "linux". Now i am trying to help them and also to help improve linux this way. For me personally more interesting right now ESFQ way. Just i am scared to put in producting patches not from mainline, cause then on issues i cannot write proper bugreport. > > Jarek P. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Denys Fedoryshchenko Technical Manager Virtual ISP S.A.L.