[PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Changli Gao]

sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level.

When a class enters HTB_MAY_BORROW state, it relies on its parents to
sent packets. The parent class in HTB_CAN_SEND state only consumes
itself and its parents's tokens, but ADD tokens to the classes under its
level. It is totally wrong. It means that a class, which sends packets
in ceil rate, can also enter HTB_CAN_SEND state now and then.

Signed-off-by: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@gmail.com>

----
net/sched/sch_htb.c | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/sched/sch_htb.c b/net/sched/sch_htb.c
index 85acab9..2705702 100644
--- a/net/sched/sch_htb.c
+++ b/net/sched/sch_htb.c
@@ -629,11 +629,10 @@ static void htb_charge_class(struct htb_sched *q, struct htb_class *cl,
 		if (cl->level >= level) {
 			if (cl->level == level)
 				cl->xstats.lends++;
-			htb_accnt_tokens(cl, bytes, diff);
 		} else {
 			cl->xstats.borrows++;
-			cl->tokens += diff;	/* we moved t_c; update tokens */
 		}
+		htb_accnt_tokens(cl, bytes, diff);
 		htb_accnt_ctokens(cl, bytes, diff);
 		cl->t_c = q->now;
 

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Jarek Poplawski]

On 03-11-2009 03:41, Changli Gao wrote:
> sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level.
> 
> When a class enters HTB_MAY_BORROW state, it relies on its parents to
> sent packets. The parent class in HTB_CAN_SEND state only consumes
> itself and its parents's tokens, but ADD tokens to the classes under its
> level. It is totally wrong.

Current code is OK.

> It means that a class, which sends packets
> in ceil rate, can also enter HTB_CAN_SEND state now and then.

Yes, a class is entitled to send on it's own then with it's guaranteed
rate, without depending on borrowing.

Jarek P.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@gmail.com>
> 
> ----
> net/sched/sch_htb.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/sched/sch_htb.c b/net/sched/sch_htb.c
> index 85acab9..2705702 100644
> --- a/net/sched/sch_htb.c
> +++ b/net/sched/sch_htb.c
> @@ -629,11 +629,10 @@ static void htb_charge_class(struct htb_sched *q, struct htb_class *cl,
>  		if (cl->level >= level) {
>  			if (cl->level == level)
>  				cl->xstats.lends++;
> -			htb_accnt_tokens(cl, bytes, diff);
>  		} else {
>  			cl->xstats.borrows++;
> -			cl->tokens += diff;	/* we moved t_c; update tokens */
>  		}
> +		htb_accnt_tokens(cl, bytes, diff);
>  		htb_accnt_ctokens(cl, bytes, diff);
>  		cl->t_c = q->now;
> 

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Changli Gao]

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It means that a class, which sends packets
>> in ceil rate, can also enter HTB_CAN_SEND state now and then.
>
> Yes, a class is entitled to send on it's own then with it's guaranteed
> rate, without depending on borrowing.

I don't think so. The class should _NOT_ enter HTB_CAN_SEND mode when
its data rate is higher than its rate specification. In other word, a
class should enter HTB_CAN_SEND mode only when its data rate isn't
higher than its rate specification. Otherwise, it will get additional
tokens and reach a higher data rate than its ceil specification. This
may affect other classes.


-- 
Regards，
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@gmail.com)

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Jarek Poplawski]

On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 05:47:17PM +0800, Changli Gao wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> It means that a class, which sends packets
> >> in ceil rate, can also enter HTB_CAN_SEND state now and then.
> >
> > Yes, a class is entitled to send on it's own then with it's guaranteed
> > rate, without depending on borrowing.
> 
> I don't think so. The class should _NOT_ enter HTB_CAN_SEND mode when
> its data rate is higher than its rate specification. In other word, a
> class should enter HTB_CAN_SEND mode only when its data rate isn't
> higher than its rate specification. Otherwise, it will get additional
> tokens and reach a higher data rate than its ceil specification. This
> may affect other classes.

The ceil specification is controlled only by ctokens, which are always
updated, so no such risk.

Regards,
Jarek P.

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Changli Gao]

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The ceil specification is controlled only by ctokens, which are always
> updated, so no such risk.
>
Nevertheless, updating tokens is necessary too.

-- 
Regards，
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@gmail.com)

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Jarek Poplawski]

On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 09:18:49PM +0800, Changli Gao wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > The ceil specification is controlled only by ctokens, which are always
> > updated, so no such risk.
> >
> Nevertheless, updating tokens is necessary too.

If it's really necessary you should present some test case fixed by
your patch, I guess.

In the meantime let's consider what could be broken:
class 1:1 (parent) rate 10 packets/sec
class 1:2 rate 5 packets/sec ceil 10 packets/sec
class 1:3 rate 5 packets/sec ceil 10 packets/sec

class 1:2 doesn't use all its rate, and sends every other second
	(in even seconds)
class 1:3 sends 10 packets during the first second, so with your
	patch it will use its tokens for 2 seconds
class 1:2 uses its rate in the second second..., so class 1:1
	can't lend anything
class 1:3 can only borrow, so it won't be able to send during
	this second anything

So, the effect would be class 1:3 sending every odd second 10 packets
while every even second - nothing...

Of course the example is a simplification of the htb algorithm. There
should be also considered priority of borrowing, which should add
similar effects even with regular traffic. But generally the
guaranteed rates would be simply...  less guaranteed.

Regards,
Jarek P.

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Changli Gao]

On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 7:00 AM, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 09:18:49PM +0800, Changli Gao wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > The ceil specification is controlled only by ctokens, which are always
>> > updated, so no such risk.
>> >
>> Nevertheless, updating tokens is necessary too.
>
> If it's really necessary you should present some test case fixed by
> your patch, I guess.
>
> In the meantime let's consider what could be broken:
> class 1:1 (parent) rate 10 packets/sec
> class 1:2 rate 5 packets/sec ceil 10 packets/sec
> class 1:3 rate 5 packets/sec ceil 10 packets/sec
>
> class 1:2 doesn't use all its rate, and sends every other second
>        (in even seconds)
> class 1:3 sends 10 packets during the first second, so with your
>        patch it will use its tokens for 2 seconds
> class 1:2 uses its rate in the second second..., so class 1:1
>        can't lend anything
> class 1:3 can only borrow, so it won't be able to send during
>        this second anything
>
> So, the effect would be class 1:3 sending every odd second 10 packets
> while every even second - nothing...

class 1:3 can send, as its parent rate is 10, but class 1:2 only uses
half of it, and class 1:1 is still in HTB_CAN_SEND mode.

The result is, hasn't any difference with or without my patch :
class 1:1 sends 10 packets in odd seconds, and 5 packets in even seconds.
class 1:2 sends 5 packets in even seconds.
class 1:1 (parent) sends 10 packets in every second.

Let's think this case in another way: which class sends packets in
even seconds first, class 1:2 or class 1:3.
With my patch, as 1:3 in HTB_MAY_BORROW mode, and 1:2 in HTB_CAN_SEND
mode, so 1:2 sends all its 5 packets first.
Without my patch, as 1:2 and 1:3 are both in HTB_CAN_SEND mode, the
sequence is undetermined. In other word, 1:2 and 1:3 are treated
fairly, and it isn't fair for 1:2, because 1:2 sends nothing in odd
seconds, and has no deficit in rate as 1:3.

-- 
Regards，
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@gmail.com)

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Jarek Poplawski]

On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 09:53:52AM +0800, Changli Gao wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 7:00 AM, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 09:18:49PM +0800, Changli Gao wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > The ceil specification is controlled only by ctokens, which are always
> >> > updated, so no such risk.
> >> >
> >> Nevertheless, updating tokens is necessary too.
> >
> > If it's really necessary you should present some test case fixed by
> > your patch, I guess.
> >
> > In the meantime let's consider what could be broken:
> > class 1:1 (parent) rate 10 packets/sec
> > class 1:2 rate 5 packets/sec ceil 10 packets/sec
> > class 1:3 rate 5 packets/sec ceil 10 packets/sec
> >
> > class 1:2 doesn't use all its rate, and sends every other second
> >        (in even seconds)
> > class 1:3 sends 10 packets during the first second, so with your
> >        patch it will use its tokens for 2 seconds
> > class 1:2 uses its rate in the second second..., so class 1:1
> >        can't lend anything
> > class 1:3 can only borrow, so it won't be able to send during
> >        this second anything
> >
> > So, the effect would be class 1:3 sending every odd second 10 packets
> > while every even second - nothing...
> 
> class 1:3 can send, as its parent rate is 10, but class 1:2 only uses
> half of it, and class 1:1 is still in HTB_CAN_SEND mode.
> 
> The result is, hasn't any difference with or without my patch :
> class 1:1 sends 10 packets in odd seconds, and 5 packets in even seconds.

I guess you meant class 1:3, and there is a difference: it sends 5
packets in even seconds only if it manages to borrow from 1:1, but
it's not _guaranteed_ at all. In this particular case it's quite
probable class 1:2 will send 10 packets in even seconds instead, or
with some finer borrowing control it could be: class 1:2 8 packets,
class 1:3 2 packets, as well.

> class 1:2 sends 5 packets in even seconds.
> class 1:1 (parent) sends 10 packets in every second.
> 
> Let's think this case in another way: which class sends packets in
> even seconds first, class 1:2 or class 1:3.
> With my patch, as 1:3 in HTB_MAY_BORROW mode, and 1:2 in HTB_CAN_SEND
> mode, so 1:2 sends all its 5 packets first.
> Without my patch, as 1:2 and 1:3 are both in HTB_CAN_SEND mode, the
> sequence is undetermined. In other word, 1:2 and 1:3 are treated
> fairly, and it isn't fair for 1:2, because 1:2 sends nothing in odd
> seconds, and has no deficit in rate as 1:3.

The token bucket (cl->buffer) is just to account distinctly when a
class is entitled to send and when it actually does send within its
rate. The fairness is controlled by classes itself with HTB_CAN_SEND
state. Using this bucket to account for borrowed sending deprives us
of this precise information. "The fairness" would be controlled by
priorities of borrowing instead (see above).

Regards,
Jarek P.

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Changli Gao]

On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > If it's really necessary you should present some test case fixed by
>> > your patch, I guess.
>> >
>> > In the meantime let's consider what could be broken:
>> > class 1:1 (parent) rate 10 packets/sec
>> > class 1:2 rate 5 packets/sec ceil 10 packets/sec
>> > class 1:3 rate 5 packets/sec ceil 10 packets/sec
>> >
>> > class 1:2 doesn't use all its rate, and sends every other second
>> >        (in even seconds)
>> > class 1:3 sends 10 packets during the first second, so with your
>> >        patch it will use its tokens for 2 seconds
>> > class 1:2 uses its rate in the second second..., so class 1:1
>> >        can't lend anything
>> > class 1:3 can only borrow, so it won't be able to send during
>> >        this second anything
>> >
>> > So, the effect would be class 1:3 sending every odd second 10 packets
>> > while every even second - nothing...
>>
>> class 1:3 can send, as its parent rate is 10, but class 1:2 only uses
>> half of it, and class 1:1 is still in HTB_CAN_SEND mode.
>>
>> The result is, hasn't any difference with or without my patch :
>> class 1:1 sends 10 packets in odd seconds, and 5 packets in even seconds.
>
> I guess you meant class 1:3.

You are right. :)

> and there is a difference: it sends 5
> packets in even seconds only if it manages to borrow from 1:1, but
> it's not _guaranteed_ at all. In this particular case it's quite
> probable class 1:2 will send 10 packets in even seconds instead, or
> with some finer borrowing control it could be: class 1:2 8 packets,
> class 1:3 2 packets, as well.

It is just correct. You focus on 1 second fairness, while I focus on 2
seconds fairness.

>
>> class 1:2 sends 5 packets in even seconds.
>> class 1:1 (parent) sends 10 packets in every second.
>>
>> Let's think this case in another way: which class sends packets in
>> even seconds first, class 1:2 or class 1:3.
>> With my patch, as 1:3 in HTB_MAY_BORROW mode, and 1:2 in HTB_CAN_SEND
>> mode, so 1:2 sends all its 5 packets first.
>> Without my patch, as 1:2 and 1:3 are both in HTB_CAN_SEND mode, the
>> sequence is undetermined. In other word, 1:2 and 1:3 are treated
>> fairly, and it isn't fair for 1:2, because 1:2 sends nothing in odd
>> seconds, and has no deficit in rate as 1:3.
>
> The token bucket (cl->buffer) is just to account distinctly when a
> class is entitled to send and when it actually does send within its
> rate. The fairness is controlled by classes itself with HTB_CAN_SEND
> state. Using this bucket to account for borrowed sending deprives us
> of this precise information. "The fairness" would be controlled by
> priorities of borrowing instead (see above).
>
The token bucket and ctoken bucket both use cl->mbuffer to control
rate granularities. If we don't account token bucket when the
corresponding class in HTB_MAY_BORROW mode, the cl->mbuffer will
become useless.


-- 
Regards，
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@gmail.com)

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Jarek Poplawski]

On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 05:16:42PM +0800, Changli Gao wrote:
...
> It is just correct. You focus on 1 second fairness, while I focus on 2
> seconds fairness.

The whole example was very simplified, so it all would certainly
differ in time and real sends, especially with an interaction of
more classes. But, generally, main HTB algorithm seems to be quite
well tested against various fair and unfair cases, starting from
the author's examples:
http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/qos/htb/manual/userg.htm
so, I guess, this type of a bug would really show somewhere long time
ago.

> The token bucket and ctoken bucket both use cl->mbuffer to control
> rate granularities. If we don't account token bucket when the
> corresponding class in HTB_MAY_BORROW mode, the cl->mbuffer will
> become useless.

cl->mbuffer is only to limit some extreme effects, so more of an
exception, not a main tool of rate control. (It really should be
useless most of the time if classes don't stop sending and aren't
deprived of their full rate for really long time.)

Regards,
Jarek P.

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Martin Devera]

Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 05:16:42PM +0800, Changli Gao wrote:
> ...
>> It is just correct. You focus on 1 second fairness, while I focus on 2
>> seconds fairness.
> 
> The whole example was very simplified, so it all would certainly
> differ in time and real sends, especially with an interaction of
> more classes. But, generally, main HTB algorithm seems to be quite
> well tested against various fair and unfair cases, starting from
> the author's examples:
> http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/qos/htb/manual/userg.htm
> so, I guess, this type of a bug would really show somewhere long time
> ago.
> 
>> The token bucket and ctoken bucket both use cl->mbuffer to control
>> rate granularities. If we don't account token bucket when the
>> corresponding class in HTB_MAY_BORROW mode, the cl->mbuffer will
>> become useless.
> 
> cl->mbuffer is only to limit some extreme effects, so more of an
> exception, not a main tool of rate control. (It really should be
> useless most of the time if classes don't stop sending and aren't
> deprived of their full rate for really long time.)

Hello,

yes you are right. If I remember correctly, I tried to charge "rate"
tokens up to root in early versions (which makes some sense) but problem
is with many interior classes stuck at extreme mbuffer value, losing
responsivity. Also it didn't played well with prio settings (class
stalls).
Bacause we don't charge "rate" now, some amount of burst can accumulate
in each interior class and decrease fairness at the same prio level a 
bit. However from measurments I did, these bursts of unfairness are
hidded by regular "bursting" of rate and ceil token buckets.

devik

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Changli Gao]

On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Martin Devera <martin.devera@cdi.cz> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> yes you are right. If I remember correctly, I tried to charge "rate"
> tokens up to root in early versions (which makes some sense) but problem
> is with many interior classes stuck at extreme mbuffer value, losing
> responsivity.

It is strange. Would you like describe it more clearly?

> Also it didn't played well with prio settings (class
> stalls).

Was it the cause?

> Bacause we don't charge "rate" now, some amount of burst can accumulate
> in each interior class and decrease fairness at the same prio level a bit.
> However from measurments I did, these bursts of unfairness are
> hidded by regular "bursting" of rate and ceil token buckets.
>

One case for unfairness.



-- 
Regards，
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@gmail.com)

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Martin Devera]

Changli Gao wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Martin Devera <martin.devera@cdi.cz> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> yes you are right. If I remember correctly, I tried to charge "rate"
>> tokens up to root in early versions (which makes some sense) but problem
>> is with many interior classes stuck at extreme mbuffer value, losing
>> responsivity.
> 
> It is strange. Would you like describe it more clearly?

oops, forget it, I mixed it with different problem I remember :-)
The idea is to charge classe's tokens when it sends.
It always must be under ceil thus when it sends we can charge
ctokens (it must have some in order to be in CAN_SEND).
If it borrows, we don't charge it because doesn't send from
its own rate but rather from parent's rate. Thus charge
only parent. Because parent gave it rate as gift, free of charge,
it has it in addition to its own rate.

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Martin Devera]

Changli Gao wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Martin Devera <martin.devera@cdi.cz> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> yes you are right. If I remember correctly, I tried to charge "rate"
>> tokens up to root in early versions (which makes some sense) but problem
>> is with many interior classes stuck at extreme mbuffer value, losing
>> responsivity.
> 
> It is strange. Would you like describe it more clearly?

Ahh I'm starting to understand. You are concerned mainly with

cl->tokens += diff;     /* we moved t_c; update tokens */

am I right ?

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Changli Gao]

On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Martin Devera <martin.devera@cdi.cz> wrote:
>
> Ahh I'm starting to understand. You are concerned mainly with
>
> cl->tokens += diff;     /* we moved t_c; update tokens */
>
> am I right ?
>

If we don't need to charge the tokens, updating it is necessary. I am
arguing the tokens isn't updated with the ctokens when the
corresponding class is in HTB_MAY_BORROW mode.

-- 
Regards，
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@gmail.com)

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Martin Devera]

Changli Gao wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Martin Devera <martin.devera@cdi.cz> wrote:
>> Ahh I'm starting to understand. You are concerned mainly with
>>
>> cl->tokens += diff;     /* we moved t_c; update tokens */
>>
>> am I right ?
>>
> 
> If we don't need to charge the tokens, updating it is necessary. I am
> arguing the tokens isn't updated with the ctokens when the
> corresponding class is in HTB_MAY_BORROW mode.
> 

Ok, then the reason is in "logic". When you have parent P and children
A,B each with half of rate and only A is sending, than we want A to use
its own rate and also B's rate. B's rate is available as excess in P.
Here I see correct to charge part to A and part to P, while you want
to charge one P and twice A. Only mbuffer will limit the duplicity.
And it is not good idea because tokens can go very negative and then 
ittroduce A's stall for some time.
I see no principial benefit...

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Changli Gao]

On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Martin Devera <martin.devera@cdi.cz> wrote:
> Changli Gao wrote:
>
> Ok, then the reason is in "logic". When you have parent P and children
> A,B each with half of rate and only A is sending, than we want A to use
> its own rate and also B's rate. B's rate is available as excess in P.
> Here I see correct to charge part to A and part to P, while you want
> to charge one P and twice A. Only mbuffer will limit the duplicity.
> And it is not good idea because tokens can go very negative and then
> ittroduce A's stall for some time.
> I see no principial benefit...
>

I get it. After reviewing the code, I find mbuffer is 1 minute. It
means that bandwidth will be unfair between A and B(A/B = 1/3) for at
least 2 minute long. It is unacceptable. I'm wrong, and need to think
it again!

-- 
Regards，
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@gmail.com)

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Changli Gao]

On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 05:16:42PM +0800, Changli Gao wrote:
> ...
>> It is just correct. You focus on 1 second fairness, while I focus on 2
>> seconds fairness.
>
> The whole example was very simplified, so it all would certainly
> differ in time and real sends, especially with an interaction of
> more classes. But, generally, main HTB algorithm seems to be quite
> well tested against various fair and unfair cases, starting from
> the author's examples:
> http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/qos/htb/manual/userg.htm
> so, I guess, this type of a bug would really show somewhere long time
> ago.
>

This documentation is old, and after the last update 5.5.2002, there
were still bugs: http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/qos/htb/ .

>> The token bucket and ctoken bucket both use cl->mbuffer to control
>> rate granularities. If we don't account token bucket when the
>> corresponding class in HTB_MAY_BORROW mode, the cl->mbuffer will
>> become useless.
>
> cl->mbuffer is only to limit some extreme effects, so more of an
> exception, not a main tool of rate control. (It really should be
> useless most of the time if classes don't stop sending and aren't
> deprived of their full rate for really long time.)
>

I don't think so. Although a class's tokens may be negative, but its
ctokens may be positive. Charging its tokens is to prevent its cmode
from being changed to HTB_CAN_SEND from HTB_CANT_SEND directly.


-- 
Regards，
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@gmail.com)

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Jarek Poplawski]

On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 07:21:48PM +0800, Changli Gao wrote:
...
> > cl->mbuffer is only to limit some extreme effects, so more of an
> > exception, not a main tool of rate control. (It really should be
> > useless most of the time if classes don't stop sending and aren't
> > deprived of their full rate for really long time.)
> >
> 
> I don't think so. Although a class's tokens may be negative, but its
> ctokens may be positive. Charging its tokens is to prevent its cmode
> from being changed to HTB_CAN_SEND from HTB_CANT_SEND directly.

I think, you should really better show some tests proving your patch
is needed and doesn't affect a case I described, instead of trying to
discuss the meaninig of all HTB variables here.

Regards,
Jarek P.

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Changli Gao]

On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 07:21:48PM +0800, Changli Gao wrote:
>>
>> I don't think so. Although a class's tokens may be negative, but its
>> ctokens may be positive. Charging its tokens is to prevent its cmode
>> from being changed to HTB_CAN_SEND from HTB_CANT_SEND directly.
>
> I think, you should really better show some tests proving your patch
> is needed and doesn't affect a case I described, instead of trying to
> discuss the meaninig of all HTB variables here.
>

I test it before sending it here, but it doesn't show any obvious
difference as Martin said, no worse and no better. I don't know how to
construct a test to show you the bad effect you worry about. Any
suggestion about the test?

-- 
Regards，
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@gmail.com)

Re: [PATCH] sch_htb.c consume the classes's tokens bellow the HTB_CAN_SEND level

[Jarek Poplawski]

On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 08:01:23PM +0800, Changli Gao wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 07:21:48PM +0800, Changli Gao wrote:
> >>
> >> I don't think so. Although a class's tokens may be negative, but its
> >> ctokens may be positive. Charging its tokens is to prevent its cmode
> >> from being changed to HTB_CAN_SEND from HTB_CANT_SEND directly.
> >
> > I think, you should really better show some tests proving your patch
> > is needed and doesn't affect a case I described, instead of trying to
> > discuss the meaninig of all HTB variables here.
> >
> 
> I test it before sending it here, but it doesn't show any obvious
> difference as Martin said, no worse and no better.

Strange... How this patch could be needed or even "necessary", and
do "no worse and no better" at the same time.

> I don't know how to
> construct a test to show you the bad effect you worry about. Any
> suggestion about the test?

E.g. something like I described, but only rates 50kbit and 100kbit
instead of 5 and 10 packets/sec.

Regards,
Jarek P.