From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarek Poplawski Subject: Re: HTB accuracy for high speed Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 22:10:27 +0200 Message-ID: <20090519201027.GA4751@ami.dom.local> References: <298f5c050905150745p13dc226eia1ff50ffa8c4b300@mail.gmail.com> <298f5c050905150749s3597328dr8dd15adbd7a37532@mail.gmail.com> <20090516141430.GB3013@ami.dom.local> <298f5c050905180736m303f0c79ha30d3f791222fa1b@mail.gmail.com> <1242688479.9558.60.camel@hazard2.francoudi.com> <1242689267.11814.1.camel@hazard2.francoudi.com> <20090519110311.GA5521@ff.dom.local> <20090519140416.GA21270@francoudi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, kaber@trash.net, davem@davemloft.net, devik@cdi.cz, Antonio Almeida To: Vladimir Ivashchenko Return-path: Received: from mail-bw0-f174.google.com ([209.85.218.174]:41854 "EHLO mail-bw0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753484AbZESUMn (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 May 2009 16:12:43 -0400 Received: by bwz22 with SMTP id 22so24208bwz.37 for ; Tue, 19 May 2009 13:12:43 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090519140416.GA21270@francoudi.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 05:04:16PM +0300, Vladimir Ivashchenko wrote: > > > Please disregard my comment about HFSC. It still overspills heavily. > > > > > > On a 400 mbps limit, I'm getting 520 mbps actual throughput. > > > > I guess you should send some logs. Your previous report seem to show > > Can you give some hints on which logs you would like to see? Similarly to Antonio's: ifconfigs and tc -s for qdiscs and classes at the beginning and at the end of testing. > > the sum of sc rates of of children could be too high. You seem to > > expect the parent's sc and ul should limit this, but actually children > > rates decide and parent's rates are mainly for lending/borrowing (at > > The children's ceil rate is 70% of the parent 1:2 class rate. How about children's main rates? > > least in HTB). So, it would be nice to try with one leaf class first, > > (similarly to Antonio) how high rates are respected. > > Unfortunately its difficult for me to play with classes as its real traffic. > I'll try to get a traffic generator. Let it be the real traffic, but please re-check these rates sums. > > High drop should be OK if the flow is much faster than scheduling/ > > hardware send rate. It could be a bit higher than in older kernels > > because of limited requeuing, but this could be corrected with > > longer queue lenghts (sfq has a very short queue: max 127). > > I don't think its sfq, since I have the same sfq qdiscs with HSFC. > > Also I'm comparing this to my production HTB box has 2.6.21.5 with esfq > and no bond (just eth), esfq also has 127p limit. > > I tried to get rid of bond on the outbound traffic, I balanced traffic > via eth0 and eth2 manually by splitting routes going through them. > > I still had the same issue with HTB not reaching the full speed. > > I'm going to try testing exactly the same configuration on 2.6.29 as I have > on 2.6.21.5 tonight. The only difference would be that I use sfq(dst) instead of > esfq(dst) which is not available on 2.6.29. I'm a bit lost about your configs/results and not reaching vs. overspilled, so please send some new data to compare (gzipped?). Jarek P.