Thread (26 messages) 26 messages, 7 authors, 2006-07-02

Re: [PATCH 0/2] NET: Accurate packet scheduling for ATM/ADSL

From: Patrick McHardy <hidden>
Date: 2006-06-21 12:54:44

Krzysztof Matusik wrote:
Dnia wtorek, 20 czerwca 2006 17:16, Patrick McHardy napisał:
quoted
The code wouldn't be very complicated, it just adds some overhead. If
you do something like I described in my previous mail the overhead for
people not using it would be an additional pointer test before reading
skb->len. I guess we could also make it a compile time option.
I personally think this is something that really improves our quality
of implementation, after all, its "wire" resources qdiscs are meant
to manage.

I'd love to see this one implemented. I'm using HFSC more than a year and it 
never provides proper QoS on ATM/ADSL links; low delays can never be achieved 
even with significant throttling below the h/w link bandwidth.
Mhh .. I trust you picked a proper clocksource and timer frequency?
This would help a lot regarding the amount of adsl users but on the other 
hand- there's not many HFSC implementations in real-life I guess (users seem 
to be afraid of it's 'complexity'). 
This idea doesn't seem look dirty- is there a chance to implement it in the 
kernel and iproute?
I hacked up a patch yesterday. I want to do a bit more testing before
posting it, but its hard to really test the effectiveness because even
without this patch my DSL line already delivers higher throughput and
much better delay than it should (its a throttled SDSL line sold as
ADSL). I'll try to do some testing on an ethernet link now.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help