| Message ID | 20190225102051.12268-1-lesliemonis@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | net: sched: pie: align PIE implementation with RFC 8033 | expand |
On 2019-02-25 5:20 a.m., Leslie Monis wrote: > The current implementation of the PIE queuing discipline is according to the > IETF draft [http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pan-aqm-pie-00] and the paper > [PIE: A Lightweight Control Scheme to Address the Bufferbloat Problem]. > However, a lot of necessary modifications and enhancements have been proposed > in RFC 8033, which have not yet been incorporated in the source code of Linux. > This patch series helps in achieving the same. > > Performance tests carried out using Flent [https://flent.org/] > +Cc the authors of PIE to double check these values. Please respond (it is how open source works!) and N/ACK cheers, jamal
On 2019-02-25 8:43 a.m., Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: > On 2019-02-25 5:20 a.m., Leslie Monis wrote: >> The current implementation of the PIE queuing discipline is according >> to the >> IETF draft [http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pan-aqm-pie-00] and the >> paper >> [PIE: A Lightweight Control Scheme to Address the Bufferbloat Problem]. >> However, a lot of necessary modifications and enhancements have been >> proposed >> in RFC 8033, which have not yet been incorporated in the source code >> of Linux. >> This patch series helps in achieving the same. >> >> Performance tests carried out using Flent [https://flent.org/] >> > > +Cc the authors of PIE to double check these values. > Please respond (it is how open source works!) and N/ACK Great. Bouncing addresses. D. Taht - can you look at this? cheers, jamal
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com> writes: > On 2019-02-25 8:43 a.m., Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >> On 2019-02-25 5:20 a.m., Leslie Monis wrote: >>> The current implementation of the PIE queuing discipline is >>> according to the >>> IETF draft [http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pan-aqm-pie-00] and >>> the paper >>> [PIE: A Lightweight Control Scheme to Address the Bufferbloat Problem]. >>> However, a lot of necessary modifications and enhancements have >>> been proposed >>> in RFC 8033, which have not yet been incorporated in the source >>> code of Linux. >>> This patch series helps in achieving the same. >>> >>> Performance tests carried out using Flent [https://flent.org/] >>> >> >> +Cc the authors of PIE to double check these values. >> Please respond (it is how open source works!) and N/ACK > > Great. Bouncing addresses. > D. Taht - can you look at this? Whose addresses are bouncing? The folk that did pie originally were mostly contractors and long ago moved on to other things. My taht.net address tends to bounce to vger as I long ago mandated starttls on all email transactions which is why I use my gmail account for postings there. I keep hoping that one day vger will support starttls... posting it here as I'm an optimist. I wasn't expecting to be cc'd on this submittal.... Pie seems to be mostly an abandoned CISCO effort outside of docsis-pie, at least at the moment. I've heard not a peep from them in years. (fq_codel seems to have mostly "won" in our world) I did review all these changes when they went by in v1, and aside from the ecn mistake ending up in the final RFC when I wasn't looking[1], approve of these changes to sch_pie to make it compliant with the rfc, finally. [1] We proposed refining pie's ecn handling here: https://github.com/gautamramk/FQ-PIE-for-Linux-Kernel/issues/2 Anyway: Acked-by: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
On 2019-02-25 9:11 a.m., Dave Taht wrote: > Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com> writes: > >> On 2019-02-25 8:43 a.m., Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >>> On 2019-02-25 5:20 a.m., Leslie Monis wrote: >>>> The current implementation of the PIE queuing discipline is >>>> according to the >>>> IETF draft [http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pan-aqm-pie-00] and >>>> the paper >>>> [PIE: A Lightweight Control Scheme to Address the Bufferbloat Problem]. >>>> However, a lot of necessary modifications and enhancements have >>>> been proposed >>>> in RFC 8033, which have not yet been incorporated in the source >>>> code of Linux. >>>> This patch series helps in achieving the same. >>>> >>>> Performance tests carried out using Flent [https://flent.org/] >>>> >>> >>> +Cc the authors of PIE to double check these values. >>> Please respond (it is how open source works!) and N/ACK >> >> Great. Bouncing addresses. >> D. Taht - can you look at this? > > Whose addresses are bouncing? The folk that did pie originally were > mostly contractors and long ago moved on to other things. > The Cisco addresses - listed as authors of PIE were bouncing. Note: they are still listed as authors of the referenced IETF draft with those email addresses. > My taht.net address tends to bounce to vger as I long ago mandated > starttls on all email transactions which is why I use my gmail account > for postings there. I keep hoping that one day vger will support > starttls... posting it here as I'm an optimist. I wasn't expecting to be > cc'd on this submittal.... > > Pie seems to be mostly an abandoned CISCO effort outside of docsis-pie, > at least at the moment. I've heard not a peep from them in years. > (fq_codel seems to have mostly "won" in our world) > > I did review all these changes when they went by in v1, and aside from > the ecn mistake ending up in the final RFC when I wasn't looking[1], > approve of these changes to sch_pie to make it compliant with the rfc, > finally. > > [1] We proposed refining pie's ecn handling here: > > https://github.com/gautamramk/FQ-PIE-for-Linux-Kernel/issues/2 > > Anyway: > > Acked-by: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> > Thats what i was hoping for. FWIW, Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com> cheers, jamal
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 06:11:25AM -0800, Dave Taht wrote: > Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com> writes: > > > On 2019-02-25 8:43 a.m., Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: > >> On 2019-02-25 5:20 a.m., Leslie Monis wrote: > >>> The current implementation of the PIE queuing discipline is > >>> according to the > >>> IETF draft [http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pan-aqm-pie-00] and > >>> the paper > >>> [PIE: A Lightweight Control Scheme to Address the Bufferbloat Problem]. > >>> However, a lot of necessary modifications and enhancements have > >>> been proposed > >>> in RFC 8033, which have not yet been incorporated in the source > >>> code of Linux. > >>> This patch series helps in achieving the same. > >>> > >>> Performance tests carried out using Flent [https://flent.org/] > >>> > >> > >> +Cc the authors of PIE to double check these values. > >> Please respond (it is how open source works!) and N/ACK > > > > Great. Bouncing addresses. > > D. Taht - can you look at this? > > Whose addresses are bouncing? The folk that did pie originally were > mostly contractors and long ago moved on to other things. > > My taht.net address tends to bounce to vger as I long ago mandated > starttls on all email transactions which is why I use my gmail account > for postings there. I keep hoping that one day vger will support > starttls... posting it here as I'm an optimist. I wasn't expecting to be > cc'd on this submittal.... > > Pie seems to be mostly an abandoned CISCO effort outside of docsis-pie, > at least at the moment. I've heard not a peep from them in years. > (fq_codel seems to have mostly "won" in our world) > > I did review all these changes when they went by in v1, and aside from > the ecn mistake ending up in the final RFC when I wasn't looking[1], > approve of these changes to sch_pie to make it compliant with the rfc, > finally. > > [1] We proposed refining pie's ecn handling here: > > https://github.com/gautamramk/FQ-PIE-for-Linux-Kernel/issues/2 > > Anyway: > > Acked-by: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> > Hi Dave, For now we would just like to make the PIE implementation meet the standards as expressed by the RFC. As ECN handling is outside the scope of the RFC we can consider refinements to it in the code later. Thanks, Leslie
The current implementation of the PIE queuing discipline is according to the IETF draft [http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pan-aqm-pie-00] and the paper [PIE: A Lightweight Control Scheme to Address the Bufferbloat Problem]. However, a lot of necessary modifications and enhancements have been proposed in RFC 8033, which have not yet been incorporated in the source code of Linux. This patch series helps in achieving the same. Performance tests carried out using Flent [https://flent.org/] Changes from v1 to v2: - Excluded the patch setting PIE dynamically active/inactive as the test results were unsatisfactory - Fixed a scaling issue when adding more auto-tuning cases which caused local variables to underflow - Changed the long if/else chain to a loop as suggested by Stephen - Changed the position of the accu_prob variable in the pie_vars structure as recommended by Stephen Mohit P. Tahiliani (7): net: sched: pie: change value of QUEUE_THRESHOLD net: sched: pie: change default value of pie_params->target net: sched: pie: change default value of pie_params->tupdate net: sched: pie: change initial value of pie_vars->burst_time net: sched: pie: add more cases to auto-tune alpha and beta net: sched: pie: add derandomization mechanism net: sched: pie: update references include/uapi/linux/pkt_sched.h | 2 +- net/sched/sch_pie.c | 107 ++++++++++++++++++++------------- 2 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)