From owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 13 20:54:18 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pf@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B3B416A400 for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:54:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: from root.org (root.org [67.118.192.226]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D06913C45D for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:54:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: (qmail 61528 invoked from network); 13 Apr 2007 19:42:38 -0000 Received: from ppp-71-139-28-99.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO ?10.0.0.235?) (nate-mail@71.139.28.99) by root.org with ESMTPA; 13 Apr 2007 19:42:38 -0000 Message-ID: <461FDD28.6030502@root.org> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 12:42:32 -0700 From: Nate Lawson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20061027) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eygene Ryabinkin References: <4617D3A6.8000201@root.org> <20070409094010.GL26348@codelabs.ru> In-Reply-To: <20070409094010.GL26348@codelabs.ru> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, pf@freebsd.org Subject: Re: call for testers: altq in current X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Technical discussion and general questions about packet filter \(pf\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:54:18 -0000 Eygene Ryabinkin wrote: > Nate, good day. > > Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 05:56:14AM +0000, nate@root.org wrote: >> A few weeks ago, I committed a change to ALTQ that I was only able to >> compile-test. What I need is someone with a laptop or other >> cpufreq-capable system that is also using ALTQ to verify that with >> powerd running, the queuing timing is now reliable. > > I see no difference between the -CURRENT from today and from 30th > March (I see that your commit was made at 26th of March, but I am > not sure that mu current was updated after it for the -CURRENT > compiled at 30th of March). > > The bad news are that the ALTQ behaves wrong: when the CPU frequency > is changed the bandwidth changes too. Either I am doing something > wrong, or your commit should be polished a bit. First, add a printf at line 915 (end of function tsc_freq_changed() in sys/contrib/altq/altq/altq_subr.c): printf("machclk_freq now %d\n", machclk_freq); Does it trigger when you change the cpu freq? Is the number printent correct (i.e. 400 million for 400 Mhz)? > My environment is: Asus A2D running AMD Mobile XP, iwi (Intel > 2915ABG) and 7-CURRENT. The pf rules were: > ----- > altq on iwi0 bandwidth 3Kb cbq queue { dflt } > queue dflt bandwidth 100% cbq(default) > pass out quick log on iwi0 proto tcp from $my_ip to any flags S/AUSPF \ > keep state queue dflt > ----- > > The interface is running at 22 Mbit/sec most of the time. No polling > was enabled. The bandwidth was measured by the ifstat, powerd was > disabled and I had changed the frequency via sysctl. Four frequencies > were used: 400, 800, 1600 and 2200. The kernel config included the > following ALTQ options: > ----- > options ALTQ > options ALTQ_CBQ > options ALTQ_RED > options ALTQ_RIO > options ALTQ_HFSC > options ALTQ_CDNR > options ALTQ_PRIQ > ----- > Basically, I made two tests: WAN and LAN downloading over FTP and > HTTP. WAN test was done for the old and new -CURRENTs and LAN test > was done just for the new -CURRENT. All tests were done in the > following manner: ifstat was spawned with the delay of 3 seconds, > files were downloaded by fetch and I manually changed the CPU > frequency via sysctl. > > First two logs, ifstat.bw3Kb.old.wan.log and ifstat.bw3Kb.new.wan.log > do show the WAN results. The 100 Kbps corresponds to 400 MHz, 200 > Kbps -- to 800 MHz, 410 Kbps -- to 1600 MHz and 560 Kbps -- to 2200 > MHz CPU speed. I thought that I was bounded by the WAN link here. What was the CPU speed on bootup? -- Nate