Hi Andy :)
* Andy Furniss <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> dixit:
> DervishD wrote:
> > I've thought that the culprit may be cpufreq. I have cpufreq scaling
> >activated, and cpufreq reduces the clock speed from 1800MHz to 1000MHz
> >when the processor is idle. This is more or less the same amount that I
> >"lose" in the rate. May this be the problem? How to fix without
> >deactivating cpufreq?
>
> Could be - I don't know. Forgetting cpufreq htb can be limited by Hz if
> the burst size is too small.
I've tested with a burst size of 1500 (my MTU) and with precomputed
values (which are 1614b for burst, 1633b for cburst) and the result is
the same.
I'm using HZ=1000 in my kernel, so my resolution is 1ms. According
to HTB docs, the burst that will cause the rate to be burst-bound is
272000bit * 1m = 272bit.
> > I'm using htb+sqf, and I can post here my tc setup if needed (is
> >quite short), including the filters. It should be OK, since it has been
> >working for almost two years. Right now I cannot disable cpufreq because
> >temperature problems, and I cannot shut down the machine either, so I
> >cannot test if cpufreq is the culprit, that's why I'm asking. I haven't
> >found anything while googling, either.
>
> If you have perturb too low on sfq the packet reordering it causes could
> make the sender back off too much.
I have a perturb of 10, as I've always used.
Finally I could turn the machine off and clean the CPU fan, so I've
make a test using the performance governor and the ondemand governor of
cpufreq and yes, the problem is the cpufreq thing :((((
I'll start a new thread here for this and will report to LKML too.
Thanks for your answer :))
Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado
--
Linux Registered User 88736 | http://www.dervishd.net
It's my PC and I'll cry if I want to... RAmen!
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
