Hi Pete,
> On Feb 10, 2017, at 12:08, Pete Heist <petehe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On Feb 10, 2017, at 11:31 AM, Jonathan Morton <chromati...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 10 Feb, 2017, at 12:05, Pete Heist <petehe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> It means that both the ingress and egress have been redirected over the
>>> same IFB device and QoS'd together.
>>
>> Okay, I guessed as much but wanted to be sure.
>>
>> I can’t think of any theoretical reason for these results. Cake’s flow
>> isolation should be robust enough to cope transparently with bidirectional
>> traffic in half-duplex mode. As you say, a C2D should easily be able to
>> keep up, and at these modest rates I can even discount PCI bandwidth as a
>> concern. So I might need to try to reproduce it here.
>>
>> Does the problem go away if you use a wired link with the same setup
>> otherwise? Or is that inconvenient to try? I have some ath9k equipped
>> machines, but they would need to be set up.
>
> Not a problem. I’ll run a spread of Cake and fq_codel over Ethernet at
> various bandwidths. It will be through their Apple USB Ethernet adapters
> (used now for management), which are also connected through a switch, but I
> think that setup should be fine for this purpose. Should be done in a hour or
> so and we’ll see…
I believe the Apple USB dongles are fastEthernet only, at least the
USB2 types I have available here, which for your tested bandwidth would work,
but it will not allow you test at what shaper rate things go pear shaped… Also
it wifi creates a bit more CPU load than wired ethernet, it _might_ make sense
to concurrently excercise the WIFI cards just to re-create the SIRQ load (but
probably not as the first experiment ;) ).
Best Regards
Sebastian
>
> Pete
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cake mailing list
> Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
_______________________________________________
Cake mailing list
Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake
