Subject: Re: [PATCH] sch_htb: ix the deficit overflows

From: Jarek Poplawski <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2009 20:18:09 +0100

Jarek Poplawski wrote, On 12/01/2009 08:12 PM:

> So, as I wrote before, your proposal based on the first variant is
> acceptable to me, but please reconsider the second idea too, e.g.
> done like this:
> 
>                  }
>                  /* this used to be after charge_class but this constelation
>                     gives us slightly better performance */
>                  if (!cl->un.leaf.q->q.qlen) {
>                          htb_deactivate(q, cl);
> +			 if (unlikely(cl->un.leaf.deficit[level] < cl->quantum)) {

Should be:
 +			 if (unlikely(cl->un.leaf.deficit[level] < -cl->quantum)) {

Jarek P.

> +				{ a warning }
> +                      	 	cl->un.leaf.deficit[level] = 0;
> +			 }
>  		 }
>                  htb_charge_class(q, cl, level, skb);
>          }
>          return skb;
>  }
>