netdev - Re: [PATCH iproute2] Re: HTB accuracy for high speed

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090528211258.GA3658@ami.dom.local>
Date:	Thu, 28 May 2009 23:12:58 +0200
From:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To:	Antonio Almeida <vexwek@...il.com>
Cc:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	kaber@...sh.net, davem@...emloft.net, devik@....cz,
	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
	Vladimir Ivashchenko <hazard@...ncoudi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2] Re: HTB accuracy for high speed

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 07:13:40PM +0100, Antonio Almeida wrote:
> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > Actually, from these two I was more interested in iproute2 more
> > fitting the kernel version. :-((It should be enough to have at least
> > tc compiled properly, I guess.)
> I installed iproute2-ss090115 with the new patch but the results are
> the same for my test scenery. HTB keeps sending 620Mbit/s when I
> configure it's ceil to 555Mbit/s, with 800 bytes packets long.
> 
> > Btw.: if at any point you think this testing is too disturbing to you
> > etc., feel free to stop this or delay in time as you like.
> I'm working on this, don't worry. Since I have a traffic
> generator/analyser, any modification you would make I can test it.
> You're free to ask.
> 
> I've been looking inside htb source code. The granularity problem
> could be in the use qdisc_rate_table or near that.

Yes, but according to my assessment there should be "only" 50Mbit
difference for this rate/packet size. Anyway, could you try a testing
patch below, which should add some granularity to this rate table?

Thanks,
Jarek P.
---

 include/net/pkt_sched.h |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/net/pkt_sched.h b/include/net/pkt_sched.h
index e37fe31..f0faf03 100644
--- a/include/net/pkt_sched.h
+++ b/include/net/pkt_sched.h
@@ -42,8 +42,8 @@ typedef u64	psched_time_t;
 typedef long	psched_tdiff_t;
 
 /* Avoid doing 64 bit divide by 1000 */
-#define PSCHED_US2NS(x)			((s64)(x) << 10)
-#define PSCHED_NS2US(x)			((x) >> 10)
+#define PSCHED_US2NS(x)			((s64)(x) << 6)
+#define PSCHED_NS2US(x)			((x) >> 6)
 
 #define PSCHED_TICKS_PER_SEC		PSCHED_NS2US(NSEC_PER_SEC)
 #define PSCHED_PASTPERFECT		0
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html