Re: [PATCH] sch_sfq: revert dont put new flow at the end of flows
flat view
From: Dave Taht <hidden>
Date: 2012-03-14 04:52:03
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Eric Dumazet [off-list ref] wrote:
This reverts commit d47a0ac7b6 (sch_sfq: dont put new flow at the end of flows) As Jesper found out, patch sounded great but has bad side effects.
Well under most circumstances it IS great. As the depth of the sfq queue increases it gets increasingly hard to trigger the problem. I've been using values in the 200-300 range, and in combination with red, haven't seen it happen. Also in part the sfq behavior observed is due to an interaction with htb's 'capture' of a packet rather than peek. The situation that jesper encountered this issue (trying to regulate flows to hundreds of downstream clients on a very deterministic test) was different from where I don't encounter it (trying to regulate flows up from a very few clients) For more details: http://www.bufferbloat.net/issues/332 But I concur in reverting this for now. Sadly. wouldn't mind if there was a way to keep it as is as an option...
In stress situation, pushing new flows in front of the queue can prevent old flows doing any progress. Packets can stay in SFQ queue for unlimited amount of time. It's possible to add heuristics to limit this problem, but this would add complexity outside of SFQ scope. A more sensible answer to Dave Taht concerns (who reported the issued I tried to solve in original commit) is probably to use a qdisc hierarchy so that high prio packets dont enter a potentially crowded SFQ qdisc.
Um, er, in today's port 80/433 world, there isn't any such thing as high prio packets. I am curious as to whether this problem can be made to happen with qfq.
Reported-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <redacted> Cc: Dave Taht <redacted> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <redacted> --- I tried various tricks to avoid a revert but in the end it sounds better to use a single queue.
I had some hope for a semi-random alternating queue
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
net/sched/sch_sfq.c | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/net/sched/sch_sfq.c b/net/sched/sch_sfq.c index 60d4718..02a21ab 100644 --- a/net/sched/sch_sfq.c +++ b/net/sched/sch_sfq.c@@ -469,11 +469,15 @@ enqueue:if (slot->qlen == 1) { /* The flow is new */ if (q->tail == NULL) { /* It is the first flow */ slot->next = x; - q->tail = slot; } else { slot->next = q->tail->next; q->tail->next = x; } + /* We put this flow at the end of our flow list. + * This might sound unfair for a new flow to wait after old ones, + * but we could endup servicing new flows only, and freeze old ones. + */ + q->tail = slot; /* We could use a bigger initial quantum for new flows */ slot->allot = q->scaled_quantum; }
-- Dave Täht SKYPE: davetaht US Tel: 1-239-829-5608 http://www.bufferbloat.net