> It would be interesting to get some samples of the actual sojourn time > as seen by CoDel in mac80211. Might be doable with bpftrace... I will try to add some trace event to get the sojourn time for the next round of tests. On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 2:14 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Kan Yan <kyan@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > >> Those were lovely, thanks!!!! Big win. Since you are on patch v10 > >> now.... Any chance you could turn ecn on and off and give it a go > >> again in your next test run? > >> > >> > >> Also: > >> > >> --step-size=.04 --socket-stats # the first is helpful to gain more > >> detail, the second as to the behavior of the tcp stack. > > > > Thanks for the feedback! I will do more tests in a few days. > > > > > >> Secondly - and AFTER this patchset stablizes, I'd like us to look into > >> returning the codel default to 10ms or less > >> from it's currently 20ms or worse setting. Tis another easy test > > > > Smaller CoDel "target" doesn't work well with wireless because the > > dequeue behavior in wireless driver is very bursty. It is quite often > > dequeues dozens of packets in one burst after one large aggregation is > > completed, so smaller CoDel "target" can cause unnecessary packet > > drop. > > It would be interesting to get some samples of the actual sojourn time > as seen by CoDel in mac80211. Might be doable with bpftrace... > > -Toke >
