From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: HTB vs CoDel performance Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 10:00:32 -0700 Message-ID: <5059FA30.8070209@hp.com> References: <1347961511.26523.216.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <1347963353.26523.224.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Eric Dumazet , networking To: Lin Ming Return-path: Received: from g6t0184.atlanta.hp.com ([15.193.32.61]:23614 "EHLO g6t0184.atlanta.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755346Ab2ISRAf (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Sep 2012 13:00:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 09/18/2012 06:26 PM, Lin Ming wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 6:15 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: >> Are you really cpu limited ? You might hit some clocks artifacts. > > Did you mean the cpu speed? It's an ARMv5 processor. > BogoMIPS : 1196.03 At the risk of typing into Eric's keyboard, he was asking if you were saturating the CPU - was it getting to 100% utilization, that sort of thing. >> rate limiting to 1Gbps probably need high resolution timers. > > High resolution timer is enabled. When you are running your tests, what sort of CPU utilization do you see on the CPU of your router with HTB on vs off. Some "quick and dirty" netperf tests on an Centrino-based laptop suggested that as an end system at least, HTB at 1 GbE (using your tc commands) increases service demand (what netperf calculates as CPU consumed per unit of work performed) ~15% for bulk transfer (netperf TCP_STREAM) and ~18% for small packet request/response (TCP_RR). rick jones