From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
Akshat Kakkar <akshat.1984@gmail.com>
Cc: Anton Danilov <littlesmilingcloud@gmail.com>,
NetFilter <netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
lartc <lartc@vger.kernel.org>, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Unable to create htb tc classes more than 64K
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 09:28:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87k1b0l70t.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9cbefe10-b172-ae2a-0ac7-d972468eb7a2@gmail.com>
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> writes:
> On 8/25/19 7:52 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 11:00 PM Akshat Kakkar <akshat.1984@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 3:37 AM Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I am using ipset + iptables to classify and not filters. Besides, if
>>>>> tc is allowing me to define qdisc -> classes -> qdsic -> classes
>>>>> (1,2,3 ...) sort of structure (ie like the one shown in ascii tree)
>>>>> then how can those lowest child classes be actually used or consumed?
>>>>
>>>> Just install tc filters on the lower level too.
>>>
>>> If I understand correctly, you are saying,
>>> instead of :
>>> tc filter add dev eno2 parent 100: protocol ip prio 1 handle
>>> 0x00000001 fw flowid 1:10
>>> tc filter add dev eno2 parent 100: protocol ip prio 1 handle
>>> 0x00000002 fw flowid 1:20
>>> tc filter add dev eno2 parent 100: protocol ip prio 1 handle
>>> 0x00000003 fw flowid 2:10
>>> tc filter add dev eno2 parent 100: protocol ip prio 1 handle
>>> 0x00000004 fw flowid 2:20
>>>
>>>
>>> I should do this: (i.e. changing parent to just immediate qdisc)
>>> tc filter add dev eno2 parent 1: protocol ip prio 1 handle 0x00000001
>>> fw flowid 1:10
>>> tc filter add dev eno2 parent 1: protocol ip prio 1 handle 0x00000002
>>> fw flowid 1:20
>>> tc filter add dev eno2 parent 2: protocol ip prio 1 handle 0x00000003
>>> fw flowid 2:10
>>> tc filter add dev eno2 parent 2: protocol ip prio 1 handle 0x00000004
>>> fw flowid 2:20
>>
>>
>> Yes, this is what I meant.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I tried this previously. But there is not change in the result.
>>> Behaviour is exactly same, i.e. I am still getting 100Mbps and not
>>> 100kbps or 300kbps
>>>
>>> Besides, as I mentioned previously I am using ipset + skbprio and not
>>> filters stuff. Filters I used just to test.
>>>
>>> ipset -N foo hash:ip,mark skbinfo
>>>
>>> ipset -A foo 10.10.10.10, 0x0x00000001 skbprio 1:10
>>> ipset -A foo 10.10.10.20, 0x0x00000002 skbprio 1:20
>>> ipset -A foo 10.10.10.30, 0x0x00000003 skbprio 2:10
>>> ipset -A foo 10.10.10.40, 0x0x00000004 skbprio 2:20
>>>
>>> iptables -A POSTROUTING -j SET --map-set foo dst,dst --map-prio
>>
>> Hmm..
>>
>> I am not familiar with ipset, but it seems to save the skbprio into
>> skb->priority, so it doesn't need TC filter to classify it again.
>>
>> I guess your packets might go to the direct queue of HTB, which
>> bypasses the token bucket. Can you dump the stats and check?
>
> With more than 64K 'classes' I suggest to use a single FQ qdisc [1], and
> an eBPF program using EDT model (Earliest Departure Time)
>
> The BPF program would perform the classification, then find a data structure
> based on the 'class', and then update/maintain class virtual times and skb->tstamp
>
> TBF = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &classid);
>
> uint64_t now = bpf_ktime_get_ns();
> uint64_t time_to_send = max(TBF->time_to_send, now);
>
> time_to_send += (u64)qdisc_pkt_len(skb) * NSEC_PER_SEC / TBF->rate;
> if (time_to_send > TBF->max_horizon) {
> return TC_ACT_SHOT;
> }
> TBF->time_to_send = time_to_send;
> skb->tstamp = max(time_to_send, skb->tstamp);
> if (time_to_send - now > TBF->ecn_horizon)
> bpf_skb_ecn_set_ce(skb);
> return TC_ACT_OK;
>
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_tc_edt.c shows something similar.
>
>
> [1] MQ + FQ if the device is multi-queues.
>
> Note that this setup scales very well on SMP, since we no longer are forced
> to use a single HTB hierarchy (protected by a single spinlock)
Wow, this is very cool! Thanks for that walk-through, Eric :)
-Toke
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-26 7:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-16 12:48 Unable to create htb tc classes more than 64K Akshat Kakkar
2019-08-16 17:45 ` Cong Wang
2019-08-17 12:46 ` Akshat Kakkar
2019-08-17 18:24 ` Cong Wang
2019-08-17 19:04 ` Akshat Kakkar
2019-08-20 6:26 ` Akshat Kakkar
2019-08-21 22:06 ` Cong Wang
2019-08-22 5:59 ` Akshat Kakkar
2019-08-25 17:52 ` Cong Wang
2019-08-26 6:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2019-08-26 7:28 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen [this message]
2019-08-27 20:53 ` Dave Taht
2019-08-27 21:09 ` Eric Dumazet
2019-08-27 21:41 ` Dave Taht
2020-01-10 12:38 ` Akshat Kakkar
2019-08-26 16:45 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87k1b0l70t.fsf@toke.dk \
--to=toke@redhat.com \
--cc=akshat.1984@gmail.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=lartc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=littlesmilingcloud@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).