Re: [Cake] BUG_ON vs WARN_ON

2016-10-05 Thread Jonathan Morton
>> I wonder what it was that caused yesterday's issues? I really must try >> again when I've more time to get proper access. > > I’m having trouble reproducing it here. I know one of my boxes froze the > very first time I loaded it, but it’s been running fine ever since. Another > machine

Re: [Cake] BUG_ON vs WARN_ON

2016-10-05 Thread Dave Taht
I cannot repeat that result this morning, with either replace or change. I *was* running far more extensive tests between changing things that way than I just did, but a string of quick tests, changing the bandwidth, changing it to unlimited, etc got the correct behaviors throughout for both

Re: [Cake] BUG_ON vs WARN_ON

2016-10-05 Thread Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant
On 05/10/16 16:53, Dave Taht wrote: I did test this version of cake yesterday, had no major problems, aside from: 1) it seeming not to register drops under some circumstances in the statistics. (could be flent) 2) switching stuff like this tc qdisc add dev eth0 root cake bandwidth 700mbit

Re: [Cake] BUG_ON vs WARN_ON

2016-10-05 Thread Dave Taht
I did test this version of cake yesterday, had no major problems, aside from: 1) it seeming not to register drops under some circumstances in the statistics. (could be flent) 2) switching stuff like this tc qdisc add dev eth0 root cake bandwidth 700mbit tc qdisc replace dev eth0 root cake

Re: [Cake] BUG_ON vs WARN_ON

2016-10-05 Thread Jonathan Morton
> On 5 Oct, 2016, at 18:45, Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant > wrote: > > I wonder what it was that caused yesterday's issues? I really must try again > when I've more time to get proper access. I’m having trouble reproducing it here. I know one of my boxes froze the

Re: [Cake] BUG_ON vs WARN_ON

2016-10-05 Thread Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant
On 05/10/16 16:42, Jonathan Morton wrote: On 5 Oct, 2016, at 18:24, Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant wrote: How amenable are you to changing all 4 BUG_ON instances in cake to WARN_ON? Linus isn't a complete fan and I'm thinking that producing a stack trace and trying

Re: [Cake] BUG_ON vs WARN_ON

2016-10-05 Thread Jonathan Morton
> On 5 Oct, 2016, at 18:24, Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant > wrote: > > How amenable are you to changing all 4 BUG_ON instances in cake to WARN_ON? > > Linus isn't a complete fan and I'm thinking that producing a stack trace and > trying to carry on is more helpful to

Re: [Cake] WireGuard Queuing, Bufferbloat, Performance, Latency, and related issues

2016-10-05 Thread Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
"Jason A. Donenfeld" writes: > On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: >> You don't need a timer. You already have a signal for when more queue >> space is available in the encryption step: When a packet finishes >> encryption. All you need

Re: [Cake] WireGuard Queuing, Bufferbloat, Performance, Latency, and related issues

2016-10-05 Thread Jason A. Donenfeld
On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: > You don't need a timer. You already have a signal for when more queue > space is available in the encryption step: When a packet finishes > encryption. All you need to do is try to enqueue another one at this > point.