This is a first stab at HFSC and FQ-CoDel integration via extending
PF queueing operations (pfq_ops) interface. With this FQ-CoDel can
be attached directly to an interface as well as serve as a replacement
for the HFSC queue to improve its characteristics. In essence, in
many setups (router
I've tried very hard to make it concise and avoided any references to
underlying algorithms.
OK?
---
share/man/man5/pf.conf.5 | 47 ---
1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git share/man/man5/pf.conf.5 share/man/man5/pf.conf.5
index
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 19:58 +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> This is the last bit required in order to actually be able to
> use FQ-CoDel. It might require some polish, but I think there's
> nothing exceptionally ugly barring the statistics interface.
>
> fqcodel_stats is c
look good?
diff --git sys/net/fq_codel.c sys/net/fq_codel.c
index 1c380f49f3d..c7fe38a7094 100644
--- sys/net/fq_codel.c
+++ sys/net/fq_codel.c
@@ -370,11 +370,11 @@ codel_next_packet(struct codel *cd, struct codel_params
*cp, int64_t now,
*drop = 1;
}
retu
k everything before getting this in.
> > >
> > > Would it be worth converting codel_intervals from us to ns so you
> > > don't need to multiply by 1000 in so many places?
> >
> > Nevermind, I see that most of codel is in terms of us not ns, so
> &
s to ns so you
> > don't need to multiply by 1000 in so many places?
>
> Nevermind, I see that most of codel is in terms of us not ns, so
> it is probably simplest to leave it that way for now.
>
> - todd
The trade off is basically the double the size of the table.
It's a bit above 1.5Kb right now and if I convert everything
to ns, it'll be just below 4K. Which is also OK I guess.
;
> > I think I've got all of the conversion right, but will double-
> > check everything before getting this in.
>
> Would it be worth converting codel_intervals from us to ns so you
> don't need to multiply by 1000 in so many places?
Nevermind, I see that most of codel
On Tue, 02 May 2017 18:59:44 +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> After switching the ph_timestamp to int64_t, the implementation
> can be re-adjusted to use int64_t timestamps throughout.
>
> I think I've got all of the conversion right, but will double-
> check everything before getting this in.
Wou
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 17:36 +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> This is an implementation of an FQ-CoDel algorithm that relies
> on Pf for configuration and providing flow information via its
> stateful inspection.
>
Thanks for mpi@, visa@ and sthen@ for looking through the code!
Aft
This is the last bit required in order to actually be able to
use FQ-CoDel. It might require some polish, but I think there's
nothing exceptionally ugly barring the statistics interface.
fqcodel_stats is constructed to have a few fields "compatible"
with the hfsc_class_stats s
This is an implementation of an FQ-CoDel algorithm that relies
on Pf for configuration and providing flow information via its
stateful inspection.
The purpose of FQ-CoDel is to provide fair sharing of bandwidth
to simultaneous connections (flows in FQ-CoDel terminology) of
different types in
On 08/15/2012 09:07 AM, Henning Brauer wrote:
> * Simon Perreault [2012-08-15 14:38]:
>> Le 2012-08-14 20:29, David Gwynne a écrit :
>>> ill have to fix that.
>> Oh, and I also realized that CBQ is even worse: it calls
>> microuptime() on every enqueue *and* every dequeue!
>>
>> If it really was a
* Simon Perreault [2012-08-15 14:38]:
> Le 2012-08-14 20:29, David Gwynne a écrit :
> >ill have to fix that.
>
> Oh, and I also realized that CBQ is even worse: it calls
> microuptime() on every enqueue *and* every dequeue!
>
> If it really was a bug, people would have noticed, no?
altq being s
queue time.
altq_hfsc_dequeue() --> read_machclk() --> microuptime()
Looks like codel won't be slowing hfsc down at least. :)
Simon
> have to do that again. :)
>
> Hey I just realized that hfsc calls microuptime() for every single packet at
dequeue time.
>
> altq_hfsc_dequeue() --> read_machclk() --> microuptime()
>
> Looks like codel won't be slowing hfsc down at least. :)
>
> Simon
queue time.
altq_hfsc_dequeue() --> read_machclk() --> microuptime()
Looks like codel won't be slowing hfsc down at least. :)
Simon
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 11:13, Simon Perreault wrote:
> Le 2012-08-14 11:03, Ted Unangst a écrit :
>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 09:42, Simon Perreault wrote:
>>
>>> - CoDel needs to timestamp each packet when it gets queued.
>>> - I added a new member in struct pkt
Le 2012-08-14 11:03, Ted Unangst a écrit :
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 09:42, Simon Perreault wrote:
- CoDel needs to timestamp each packet when it gets queued.
- I added a new member in struct pkthdr for this. Is this ok?
- I end up calling microuptime() for each packet. Is this ok?
You want to
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 09:42, Simon Perreault wrote:
> - CoDel needs to timestamp each packet when it gets queued.
> - I added a new member in struct pkthdr for this. Is this ok?
> - I end up calling microuptime() for each packet. Is this ok?
You want to use getmicrouptime, it'
Hi tech@,
I started implementing CoDel[1] in altq, as an alternative to RED. It's based on
the Linux implementation, which is dual-licensed GPL/BSD. I'm looking for early
feedback (design, big issues, etc.). Work-in-progress diff is below.
The big issues I see are:
- CoDel needs to
20 matches
Mail list logo
