On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 02:45:34PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:

Jarek Poplawski wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 12:45:28PM +0100, Antonio Almeida wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Antonio Almeida wrote:

quoted

I'm getting great values with this patch!
...
I'll get back to you with more values.

The steps are much smaller and the error keeps lower than 1%.
Injecting over 950Mpbs of tcp packets of 800bytes I get these values:

Nice values - should be acceptable, I guess. Alas this is not all, and
I'll ask you soon for re-testing HFSC (after another patch) or maybe
even some simple CBQ setup ;-)

I didn't follow the full discussion, so I'm not sure which kind of
arithmetic error you're attempting to cure. For the HFSC scaling
factors, please just keep in mind that its also supposed to be
very accurate at low bandwidths.

It's all here:

http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/129301

Of course, I'd appreciate any suggestions.

Thanks,
Jarek P.