netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
To: Russell Stuart <russell-tcatm@stuart.id.au>
Cc: hadi@cyberus.ca, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@diku.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH REPOST 1/2] NET:	Accurate	packet	scheduling	for	ATM/ADSL (kernel)
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 05:05:45 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <45AEF219.2060304@trash.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1169075223.7560.15.camel@ras>

Russell Stuart wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 14:07 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote: 
> 
>>Qdiscs don't use RTABs to measure rates but to calculate
>>transmission times. Transmission time is always related
>>to the length, the difference between our patches is that
>>you modify the RTABs in advance to include the overhead
>>in the calculation, my patch changes the length used to
>>look up the transmission time. Which works with or
>>without RTABs.
> 
> 
> Thanks, I understand now.

Glad we found some common ground :)

> I had decided that that STAB was indeed the way forward,
> and hence I should devote my time to making it work 
> with ADSL/ATM.  The only issue is now I don't have 
> any spare time right now.
> 
> Yesterday I was chatting about this at LCA 2007, and 
> it dawned on me that there is a problem with the dual
> RTAB/STAB approach.
> 
> Currently the lookup in the kernel is
>   time_to_transmit_a_packet = RTAB[packet_length_seen_by_kernel]
> 
> As I understand it, you are proposing to change that to
>   time_to_transmit_a_packet
>     = RTAB[STAB[packet_length_seen_by_kernel]]
>     = RTAB[packet_length_seen_on_the_wire]
> 
> Given RTAB is the same in both cases the results of the
> calculation will be different (and ergo wrong in one case
> or the other).  RTAB can't change and remain compatible 
> with old kernels.  Ergo this approach breaks backward 
> compatibility.

RTABs don't change, they continue to work as before. But when
an STAB is present the lookup is based on the STAB size mapping.
Neither one is wrong, RTABs calculate the transmission time based
only on the specified rate, RTABs + STABs calculate the
transmission time based on the rate, but include external overhead.

> I can't see any way forward but to break the link 
> between RTAB and STAB.  Personally I think this is a 
> good thing, as I think STAB should replace RTAB 
> completely.  One way to do this is to give the kernel
> STAB + transmission rate, so the calculation above
> becomes:
> 
>   time_to_transmit_a_packet
>     = STAB[packet_length_seen_by_kernel] * transmission_rate
> 
> RTAB disappears in new kernels, and the compatibility
> problem goes with it.

(STAB[..] / transmission_rate)

Removing RTABs would break compatibilty, I don't really see why
adding STABs would.

  reply	other threads:[~2007-01-18  4:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-10-16 23:34 [PATCH REPOST 1/2] NET: Accurate packet scheduling for ATM/ADSL (kernel) Russell Stuart
2006-10-17 13:07 ` jamal
2006-10-19  3:41   ` David Miller
2006-10-19 14:38   ` Patrick McHardy
2006-10-20  0:49     ` jamal
2006-10-20  8:54       ` Patrick McHardy
2006-10-23 11:22     ` Russell Stuart
2006-10-23 12:39       ` Patrick McHardy
2006-10-23 21:54         ` Russell Stuart
2006-10-24 16:19           ` Patrick McHardy
2006-10-24 20:00             ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2006-10-24 23:46             ` Russell Stuart
2006-11-30 13:07               ` Patrick McHardy
2007-01-17 23:07                 ` Russell Stuart
2007-01-18  4:05                   ` Patrick McHardy [this message]
2007-01-18  6:16                     ` Russell Stuart
     [not found]                       ` <45AF5C02.1010005@trash.net>
2007-01-19  3:11                         ` Russell Stuart
2007-01-19 12:19                           ` Patrick McHardy
2007-01-20  3:25                             ` Russell Stuart
2007-01-20  8:47                               ` Patrick McHardy
2007-01-21  7:45                                 ` Russell Stuart
2007-01-24 16:38                                   ` Patrick McHardy
2007-01-24 22:32                                     ` Russell Stuart
2007-01-25  0:06                                       ` Patrick McHardy
2007-01-25  0:55                                         ` Russell Stuart

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=45AEF219.2060304@trash.net \
    --to=kaber@trash.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=hadi@cyberus.ca \
    --cc=hawk@diku.dk \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=russell-tcatm@stuart.id.au \
    /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).