Google
  Web www.spinics.net

prio qdisc broken?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Hello all,
I might make a fool out of me, but I think the prio qdisc doesn't work  as
advertised in any document I could lay my hands on.

The following tests and observations were made with Linux kernel 2.6.20.21.
 This makes it up-to-date in the 2.6.20.x kernel family.

My problem was that the link quality reported by the olsr.org olsrd  degraded
depending on the amount of payload traffic was transferred through an
adhoc/mesh interface. The LQ is calculated from the packet loss of LQ  Hello
packets sent through this interface. To make sure normal traffic  does not
interfere with this value, olsrd sets the TOS field to 0x10  (Minimize-Delay)
by default. In theory this should give olsr traffic the highest  priority on the link.

Investigating this issue I replaced the default Pfifo_fast with a prio  qdisc and
attached a pfifo on each of the bands:

    INTERFACE=wifi0
    tc qdisc add dev $INTERFACE root handle 1: prio
    tc qdisc add dev $INTERFACE parent 1:1 handle 10: pfifo
    tc qdisc add dev $INTERFACE parent 1:2 handle 20: pfifo
    tc qdisc add dev $INTERFACE parent 1:3 handle 30: pfifo

Then I used "ping -Q TOSVALUE target" to send packets with different TOS
values  through the interface. "tcpdump -vvv" confirmed the correct TOS values
in the  outgoing packets.

With "tc -s qdisc ls dev wifi0" I could observe the effects of the  different TOS
values. The result: no effect at all! Every single packet  used the band indicated
by the first value in the priomap (e.g. band 1 by  default, in my case the pfifo
with handle 20:). I can't square this  observation with the available documentation.

Looking at the source code, it seems that sched_prio uses the  skb->priority
value to select the outgoing band. According to some documentation  I found,
an application can set this value.

The following is more speculation than an educated guess: Could it be that
skb->priority used to be set according to the TOS field by default and that this
changed after the implementation of prio?

So, can somebody confirm or deny that the problem I see is real? Is there a fix?

Thanks in advance
  Joerg



      Heute schon einen Blick in die Zukunft von E-Mails wagen? Versuchen Sie´s mit dem neuen Yahoo! Mail. www.yahoo.de/mail
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc


[Bugtraq]     [Fedora Legacy]     [GCC Help]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [IP Tables]     [Netfilter Devel]     [Fedora Users]

Powered by Linux