public inbox for netdev@vger.kernel.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail•com>
To: Steven Brudenell <steven.brudenell@gmail•com>
Cc: netdev@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: tbf/htb qdisc limitations
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 23:59:32 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101012215932.GA1945@del.dom.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikQkCcPXtRQGp=MQrjrWtae84VzbENn5x+1yC47@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 03:31:48PM -0400, Steven Brudenell wrote:
> > Yes, it's not allowed according to Documentation/HOWTO. Btw, as you
> > can see e.g. in sch_hfsc comments, 64-bit division is avoided too.
> 
> i see sch_hfsc avoids do_div in critical areas for performance
> reasons, but uses it other places. it should still be alright to
> do_div in tbf_change and htb_change_class, right? it would be nice to
> compute the rtabs in those functions instead of having userspace do
> it.

Right, tbf_change or htb_change_class are on the "slow path". But
to compute these rtabs you need passing more parameters than rate.
And userspace would still do most of it for backward compatibility.

> 
> > I can only say there is no versioning, but backward compatibility
> > is crucial, so you need to do some tricks or data duplication.
> > You could probably try to get opinions about it with an RFC on
> > moving tbf and htb schedulers to 64 bits if you're interested
> > (decoupling it from your specific burst problem).
> 
> my burst problem is the only semi-legitimate motivation i can think
> of. the only other possible motivations i can imagine are setting
> "limit" to buffer more than 4GB of packets and setting "rate" to
> something more than 32 gigabit; both of these seem kind of dubious. is
> there something else you had in mind?

No, mainly 10 gigabit rates and additionally 64-bit stats.

> looking more at the netlink tc interface: why is it that the interface
> for so many qdiscs consists of passing a big options struct as a
> single netlink attr, instead of a bunch of individual attrs? this kind
> of seems contrary to the extensibility / flexibility spirit of
> netlink, and seems to be getting in the way of changing the interface.
> maybe i should RFC about this instead ;)

Sure, you can (I'm not the netlink expert).

Jarek P.

  reply	other threads:[~2010-10-12 21:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-10-08 20:58 tbf/htb qdisc limitations Steven Brudenell
2010-10-10 11:23 ` Jarek Poplawski
2010-10-11 22:27   ` Steven Brudenell
2010-10-12 10:10     ` Jarek Poplawski
2010-10-12 19:31       ` Steven Brudenell
2010-10-12 21:59         ` Jarek Poplawski [this message]
2010-10-12 22:17           ` Rick Jones
2010-10-13  6:26             ` Jarek Poplawski
2010-10-14  3:36               ` Bill Fink
2010-10-14  4:01                 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-10-14  6:34                   ` Bill Fink
2010-10-14  6:44                 ` Jarek Poplawski
2010-10-14  7:13                   ` Bill Fink
2010-10-14  8:09                     ` Jarek Poplawski
2010-10-14  8:50                       ` Jarek Poplawski
2010-10-15  6:37                         ` Bill Fink
2010-10-15  6:44                           ` Eric Dumazet
2010-10-15 21:37                             ` Bill Fink
2010-10-15 22:05                               ` Jarek Poplawski
2010-10-16  4:51                                 ` Bill Fink
2010-10-16 20:58                                   ` Jarek Poplawski
2010-10-17  1:24                                     ` Bill Fink
2010-10-17 20:36                                       ` Jarek Poplawski
2010-10-19  7:37                                         ` Bill Fink
2010-10-20 11:06                                           ` Jarek Poplawski
2010-10-27  4:51                                             ` Bill Fink
2010-10-27  9:48                                               ` Jarek Poplawski
2010-10-15  8:18                           ` Jarek Poplawski

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=20101012215932.GA1945@del.dom.local \
    --to=jarkao2@gmail$(echo .)com \
    --cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    --cc=steven.brudenell@gmail$(echo .)com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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