On 10/07/15 19:46, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
Hi Fred,
your results seem to indicate that cake is not active at all, as the latency
under load is abysmal (a quick check is to look at the median in relation to
the min and the 90% number, in your examples all of these are terrible). Could
you please post the result of the following commands on your router:
1) cat /etc/config/sqm
config queue 'eth1'
option qdisc 'fq_codel'
option script 'simple.qos'
option qdisc_advanced '0'
option linklayer 'none'
option enabled '0'
option interface 'eth1'
option download '0'
option upload '0'
2) tc -d qdisc
qdisc fq_codel 0: dev eth0 root refcnt 2 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum
300 target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
qdisc fq_codel 0: dev eth1 root refcnt 2 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum
300 target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
qdisc mq 0: dev wlan1 root
qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan1 parent :1 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan1 parent :2 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan1 parent :3 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan1 parent :4 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
qdisc mq 0: dev wlan0 root
qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan0 parent :1 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan0 parent :2 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan0 parent :3 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
qdisc fq_codel 0: dev wlan0 parent :4 limit 1024p flows 1024 quantum 300
target 5.0ms interval 100.0ms ecn
qdisc cake 8002: dev pppoe-wan root refcnt 2 bandwidth 850Kbit
besteffort flows raw
qdisc ingress ffff: dev pppoe-wan parent ffff:fff1 ----------------
qdisc cake 8001: dev ifb4pppoe-wan root refcnt 2 bandwidth 11500Kbit
besteffort flows atm overhead 40
3) tc -d class show dev pppoe-wan
class cake 8002:2fa parent 8002:
4) tc -d class show dev ifb4pppoe-wqn
class cake 8001:6e parent 8001:
5) /etc/init.d/sqm stop
SQM: Trying to start/stop SQM on all interfaces.
SQM: run.sh stop
SQM: /usr/lib/sqm/run.sh SQM for interface eth1 is not enabled, skipping
over...
6) /etc/init.d/sqm start
/etc/init.d/sqm start
SQM: Trying to start/stop SQM on all interfaces.
SQM: /usr/lib/sqm/run.sh SQM for interface eth1 is not enabled, skipping
over...
hopefully these give some insight what might have happened.
And finally I would love to learn the output of:
sh betterspeedtest.sh -4 -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -t 150 -p
netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -n 4 ; sh netperfrunner.sh -4 -H
netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -t 150 -p netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -n 4
betterspeedtest.sh not installed
sh betterspeedtest.sh -4 -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.ne
t -t 150 -p netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -n 4 ; sh netperfrunner.sh -4 -H
netperf-
eu.bufferbloat.net -t 150 -p netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -n 4
sh: can't open 'betterspeedtest.sh'
2015-07-10 20:10:55 Testing netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) with 4
streams down and up while pinging netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net. Takes
about 150 seconds.
Download: 6.8 Mbps
Upload: 0.59 Mbps
Latency: (in msec, 152 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
Min: 73.911
10pct: 232.211
Median: 308.556
Avg: 305.686
90pct: 376.183
Max: 412.553
Many Thanks & Best Regards
Sebastian
On Jul 10, 2015, at 20:25 , Fred Stratton <fredstrat...@imap.cc> wrote:
By your command
Rebooted to rerun qdisc script, rather than changing qdiscs from the
command-line, so suboptimal process as end-point changed.
script configuring qdiscs and overhead 40 on
sh netperfrunner.sh -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -p 2.96.48.1
2015-07-10 18:22:08 Testing netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) with 4 streams
down and up while pinging 2.96.48.1. Takes about 60 seconds.
Download: 6.73 Mbps
Upload: 0.58 Mbps
Latency: (in msec, 62 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
Min: 24.094
10pct: 172.654
Median: 260.563
Avg: 253.580
90pct: 330.003
Max: 411.145
script configuring qdiscs on flows raw
sh netperfrunner.sh -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -p
78.145.32.1
2015-07-10 18:49:21 Testing netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) with 4 streams
down and up while pinging 78.145.32.1. Takes about 60 seconds.
Download: 6.75 Mbps
Upload: 0.59 Mbps
Latency: (in msec, 59 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
Min: 23.605
10pct: 169.789
Median: 282.155
Avg: 267.099
90pct: 333.283
Max: 376.509
script configuring qdiscs and overhead 36 on
sh netperfrunner.sh -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -p
80.44.96.1
2015-07-10 19:20:18 Testing netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net (ipv4) with 4 streams
down and up while pinging 80.44.96.1. Takes about 60 seconds.
Download: 6.56 Mbps
Upload: 0.59 Mbps
Latency: (in msec, 62 pings, 0.00% packet loss)
Min: 22.975
10pct: 195.473
Median: 281.756
Avg: 271.609
90pct: 342.130
Max: 398.573
On 10/07/15 16:19, Alan Jenkins wrote:
I'm glad to hear there's a working version (even if it's not in the current
build :).
Do you have measurable improvements with overhead configured (v.s.
unconfigured)?
I've used netperfrunner from CeroWrtScripts, e.g.
sh netperfrunner.sh -H netperf-eu.bufferbloat.net -p $ISP_ROUTER
I believe accounting for overhead helps on this two-way test, because a) it
saturates the uplink b) about half that bandwidth is tiny ack packets
(depending on bandwidth asymmetry). And small packets have proportionally high
overhead.
(But it seems to only make a small difference for me, which always surprises
Seb).
Alan
On 10/07/15 15:52, Fred Stratton wrote:
You are absolutely correct.
I tried both a numeric overhead value, and alternatively 'pppoe-vcmux'
and 'ether-fcs' in the build I crafted based on r46006, which is lupin
undeclared version 2. Everything works as stated.
On lupin undeclared version 4, the current release based on r46117, the
values were not recognised.
Thank you.
I had cake running on a Lantiq ADSL gateway running the same r46006
build. Unfortunately this was bricked by attempts to get homenet
working, so I have nothing to report about gateway usage at present.
On 10/07/15 13:57, Jonathan Morton wrote:
You're already using correct syntax - I've written it to be quite
lenient and use sensible defaults for missing information. There are
several sets of keywords and parameters which are mutually orthogonal,
and don't depend on each other, so "besteffort" has nothing to do with
"overhead" or "atm".
What's probably happening is that you're using a slightly old version
of the cake kernel module which lacks the overhead parameter entirely,
but a more up to date tc which does support it. We've seen this
combination crop up ourselves recently.
- Jonathan Morton
_______________________________________________
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
_______________________________________________
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
