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  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]
Date:	Sat, 16 Oct 2010 00:51:06 -0400
From:	Bill Fink <billfink@...dspring.com>
To:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>,
	Steven Brudenell <steven.brudenell@...il.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: tbf/htb qdisc limitations

On Sat, 16 Oct 2010, Jarek Poplawski wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 05:37:46PM -0400, Bill Fink wrote:
> ...
> > i7test7% tc -s -d qdisc show dev eth2
> > qdisc prio 1: root refcnt 33 bands 3 priomap  1 2 2 2 1 2 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
> >  Sent 11028687119 bytes 1223828 pkt (dropped 293, overlimits 0 requeues 0) 
> >  backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 
> > qdisc tbf 10: parent 1:1 rate 8900Mbit burst 1112500b/64 mpu 0b lat 4295.0s 
> >  Sent 11028687077 bytes 1223827 pkt (dropped 293, overlimits 593 requeues 0) 
> >  backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 
> > 
> > I'm not sure how you can have so many dropped but not have
> > any TCP retransmissions (or not show up as requeues).  But
> > there's probably something basic I just don't understand
> > about how all this stuff works.
> 
> Me either, but it seems higher "limit" might help with these drops.

You were of course correct about the higher limit helping.
I finally upgraded the field system to 2.6.35, and did some
testing on the real data path of interest, which has an RTT
of about 29 ms.  I set up a rate limit of 8 Gbps using the
following commands:

tc qdisc add dev eth2 root handle 1: prio
tc qdisc add dev eth2 parent 1:1 handle 10: tbf rate 8000mbit limit 35000000 burst 20000 mtu 9000
tc filter add dev eth2 protocol ip parent 1: prio 1 u32 match ip protocol 6 0xff match ip dst 192.168.1.23 flowid 10:1

hecn-i7sl1% nuttcp -T10 -i1 -w50m 192.168.1.23
  676.3750 MB /   1.00 sec = 5673.4646 Mbps     0 retrans
  948.5625 MB /   1.00 sec = 7957.1508 Mbps     0 retrans
  948.8125 MB /   1.00 sec = 7959.5902 Mbps     0 retrans
  948.3750 MB /   1.00 sec = 7955.5382 Mbps     0 retrans
  949.0000 MB /   1.00 sec = 7960.6696 Mbps     0 retrans
  948.7500 MB /   1.00 sec = 7958.7873 Mbps     0 retrans
  948.6875 MB /   1.00 sec = 7958.0959 Mbps     0 retrans
  948.6250 MB /   1.00 sec = 7957.4205 Mbps     0 retrans
  948.7500 MB /   1.00 sec = 7958.7237 Mbps     0 retrans
  948.4375 MB /   1.00 sec = 7956.3648 Mbps     0 retrans

 9270.5625 MB /  10.09 sec = 7707.7457 Mbps 24 %TX 36 %RX 0 retrans 29.38 msRTT

hecn-i7sl1% tc -s -d qdisc show dev eth2
qdisc prio 1: root refcnt 33 bands 3 priomap  1 2 2 2 1 2 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
 Sent 9779476756 bytes 1084943 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) 
 backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 
qdisc tbf 10: parent 1:1 rate 8000Mbit burst 19000b/64 mpu 0b lat 35.0ms 
 Sent 9779476756 bytes 1084943 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 1831360 requeues 0) 
 backlog 0b 0p requeues 0 

No drops!

BTW the effective rate limit seems to be a very coarse adjustment
at these speeds.  I was seeing some data path issues at 8.9 Gbps
so I tried setting slightly lower rates such as 8.8 Gbps, 8.7 Gbps,
etc, but they still gave me an effective rate limit of about 8.9 Gbps.
It wasn't until I got down to a setting of 8 Gbps that I actually
got an effective rate limit of 8 Gbps.

Also the man page for tbf seems to be wrong/misleading about
the burst parameter.  It states:

	"If your buffer is too small, packets may be dropped because more
	tokens arrive per timer tick than fit in your bucket.  The minimum
	buffer size can be calculated by dividing the rate by HZ.

According to that, with a rate of 8 Gbps and HZ=1000, the minimum
burst should be 1000000 bytes.  But my testing shows that a burst
of just 20000 works just fine.  That's only 2 9000-byte packets
or about 20 usec of traffic at the 8 Gbps rate.  Using too large
a value for burst can actually be harmful as it allows the traffic
to temporarily exceed the desired rate limit.

						-Thanks

						-Bill
--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists