On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 11:49 +0200, Martin Devera wrote: > At time of HTB implementation I needed to reach 100MBit speed on > relatively slow box. The hysteresis was a way. On other side I used > hand-made TSC based measure tool to compute exact (15%) performance > gain. Today I'd measure it using oprofile. > > When rethinking it again I'd suggest to re-measure real performance > impact for both flat and deep class hierarchy and consider switching the > hysteresis off by default (or even to remove the code if the gain is > negligible). If it is the case then it is the cleanest solution IMHO. I attended LCA 2006 this year. There was a presentation by a group in New Zealand using Debian running on a embedded box to bring the Internet to rural communities. Some of these communities didn't have power or telephone, so the setup ran over 802.11 over distances of up to 23Km using solar cells for power. I don't recall exactly, but I think the embedded box was using a 486 equivalent. I think they had around 40 of these things up and going. The point of the story is there are people out there who use Linux on small processors, and often do imaginative things with them. We would be doing them a disservice by ripping out the code. > On other side I see no problem with attached patches. Have you tested > patched kernel with old "tc" tool ? Yes. _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
