From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarek Poplawski Subject: Re: testing crazy stuff with iproute2 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2007 22:09:01 +0100 Message-ID: <4774146D.1030502@gmail.com> References: <20071226045037.M75814@visp.net.lb> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Denys Fedoryshchenko Return-path: Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.169]:40976 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751977AbXL0VFj (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Dec 2007 16:05:39 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id z38so1708817ugc.16 for ; Thu, 27 Dec 2007 13:05:37 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20071226045037.M75814@visp.net.lb> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote, On 12/26/2007 05:57 AM: ... > But i got few times in dmesg, during tests (probably when i set sfq instead > pfifo, or etc). > > [2090816.116000] htb: class 10003 isn't work conserving ?! > > Is it a bug? And does it worth to do such "shaper"? It's not a bug - htb simply wonders the sub-queue has packets, but doesn't dequeue any when expected. Probably htb + tbf isn't the most common configuration, but nothing wrong either. You should only consider htb could do similar (not exactly) job by itself, and each additional qdisc adds some latency, so it's only a question of priorities. But, hmm, ...don't you think this lartc.org's mailing list is really nice? Regards, Jarek P. PS: BTW, maybe I missed this, but I hoped you'd share here some impressions from testing this new PSPacer scheduler?