netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3] Add Common Applications Kept Enhanced (cake) qdisc

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]

Date:   Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:59:52 -0700
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:     Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...e.dk>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     cake@...ts.bufferbloat.net, Dave Taht <dave.taht@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3] Add Common Applications Kept Enhanced (cake)
 qdisc



On 04/25/2018 09:55 AM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:

> Well, as I said, 10Gbit+ links are not really the target audience ;)

Well, 640KB of memory is all we need.

> 
> We did actually have a threshold at some point, but it was removed
> because it didn't work well (I'm not sure of the details, perhaps
> someone else will chime in).
> 
> However, I'm fine with adding a flag, as long as peeling defaults to on,
> at least when the shaper is active (to properly account for packet
> overhead we really need to see every packet that goes out on the wire).
> Would that be acceptable?


Not a flag, a threshold based on bandwidth.