From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"Stephen Hemminger" <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
"Tom Herbert" <therbert@google.com>,
"David Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"Hannes Frederic Sowa" <hannes@stressinduktion.org>,
"Daniel Borkmann" <dborkman@redhat.com>,
"Florian Westphal" <fw@strlen.de>,
"Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>,
"Dave Taht" <dave.taht@gmail.com>,
brouer@redhat.com
Subject: Re: Qdisc: Measuring Head-of-Line blocking with netperf-wrapper
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 09:39:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140917093956.1115fd61@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1410885016.7106.203.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 09:30:16 -0700
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 17:56 +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 06:59:19 -0700
> > Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > With the TCP usec rtt work I did lately, you'll get more precise results
> > > from a TCP_RR flow, as Tom and I explained.
> >
> > Here you go, developed a new test:
>
> Just to make sure I understand (sorry I dont have time going all your
> graphs right now)
Summary for you:
1) I have created the TCP_RR latency test you and Tom asked for.
2) Graphs shows TCP_RR and UDP_RR are more accurate than ping
3) Graphs shows that ping is within same range as TCP_RR and UDP_RR
4) My only problem, NoneXSO case does not work with TCP_RR, and
I need the NoneXSO case for evaluating my qdisc bulking patches.
> The target of your high prio flow is different from target of the
> antagonist flows ?
>
> Otherwise, you are not only measuring head of line blocking of your
> host, but the whole chain, including scheduling latencies of the
> (shared) target.
For the target-host I'm avoiding the problem, as it receives packets on
different HW queue and netservers will be running on different CPUs.
For the host, I'm by design, forcing it to run on the same single CPU,
to force using the same HW queue, so I can measure this HW queue and
its/BQLs push back. So, yes the host, is also affected by scheduling
latencies, which is bad. (perhaps reason NoneXSO cannot util BW).
How can I construct a test-case, on the host, to solve this problem?
(and still using/measuring the same xmit HW queue)
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Sr. Network Kernel Developer at Red Hat
Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-17 7:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-15 16:45 Qdisc: Measuring Head-of-Line blocking with netperf-wrapper Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2014-09-15 17:10 ` Tom Herbert
2014-09-15 17:24 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-09-15 18:55 ` Dave Taht
2014-09-15 19:12 ` Rick Jones
2014-09-16 6:30 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2014-09-16 15:52 ` Tom Herbert
2014-09-16 13:22 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2014-09-16 13:59 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-09-16 15:56 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2014-09-16 16:08 ` Dave Taht
2014-09-16 16:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-09-17 7:39 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
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=20140917093956.1115fd61@redhat.com \
--to=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=dave.taht@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dborkman@redhat.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=hannes@stressinduktion.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=therbert@google.com \
--cc=toke@toke.dk \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).