Re: [PATCH 0/2] NET: Accurate packet scheduling for ATM/ADSL (RTAB BUG)

2006-07-20 Thread Alexey Kuznetsov
Hello! It shouldn't be. Any decimal number can be expressed as a fraction, eg: I remember this. :-) I stalled selecting corrects divisors to fight over/underflows. Not becuase it was difficult, just because did not see a reason to do this. But doing so would get rid of the table

Re: [PATCH 0/2] NET: Accurate packet scheduling for ATM/ADSL (RTAB BUG)

2006-07-19 Thread Jesper Dangaard Brouer
Russell Stuart wrote: - As it stands, it doesn't help the qdiscs that use RTAB. So unless he proposes to remove RTAB entirely the ATM patch as it will still have to go in. Here is a very important point here: The RTAB (rate-table) in the kernel is NOT aligned, this is the ONLY reason

Re: [PATCH 0/2] NET: Accurate packet scheduling for ATM/ADSL (RTAB BUG)

2006-07-19 Thread Alexey Kuznetsov
Hello! Guess that Alexey wrote these RTAB lookup in a time where array lookups was faster... now we have that memory lookups are the bottleneck. No, they were slower from the very beginning. If I remember correctly, there is comment about this somewhere. I just did not find any simple way to

Re: [PATCH 0/2] NET: Accurate packet scheduling for ATM/ADSL (RTAB BUG)

2006-07-19 Thread Russell Stuart
On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 01:00 +0400, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote: Hello! So you really do exist? I thought it was just rumour. Well, if fixed point arithmetics is not a problem. It shouldn't be. Any decimal number can be expressed as a fraction, eg: 0.00123 = 123/10 Which can be calculated