enabled 1 is needed
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Fred Stratton <fredstrat...@imap.cc> wrote: > > > 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 -- Dave Täht worldwide bufferbloat report: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat And: What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone? https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast _______________________________________________ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
