[PATCH 0/8]: 2 Bug fixes, all earlier patches revised

[PATCH 0/8]: 2 Bug fixes, all earlier patches revised

[Gerrit Renker]

I have been doing bug hunting almost all day, two bug fixes are enclosed, 
for the remainder I am willing to stick my head into the code next week
until the performance is up to a reasonable level and most of the known
bugs are ironed out. 

I went through the earlier patches and tossed out some material and re-arranged
the TFRC lookup stuff in a different way. I think it is now much easier to read.


Patch 1: Bug fix: sending rates were calculated before X_recv/p  were updated
Patch 2: Removes the `Illegal ACK received message' [it is harmless]
 

Patches 3..8 correspond to the earlier TFRC patches (much smaller now): 
     Ian I would appreciate if you could have a look at these. 
     I have put in effort to explain them clearer. While the performance still
     is bad, these are a step forward. In particular, the parameter checking is
     useful to have.  Should it be needed, I have documented all everything on
     http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gerrit/dccp/tfrc_documentation/doc/


Patch 3: just adds documentation for the TFRC lookup table; no code change, but
         this provides the basis for all other patches (the formulas)

Patch 4: corrects a small error in the reverse lookup function; I 
         have now added a detailed explanation _why_ this is an error.

Patch 5: adds extensive parameter checking to the TFRC lookup routines.

Patch 6: wraps up the previous steps by simplifying the forward lookup. 
         It also defines a constant for the lowest possible resolution and
         adds a warning if p is greater than 0 and less than this threshold.

Patch 7: deprecates the use of TFRC_SMALLEST_P in ccid3.c. It is subsumed
         by the minimum threshold set in Patch 4. The use of TFRC_SMALLEST_P
         is dangerous, as it masks large errors for low values of p.
         The resolution error is exactly given by:
           (f(0.0001) - f(p))/f(p) * 100
         and for TFRC_SMALLEST_P = 0.00004 this is still a value of about 58%!
         It is better to observe the warning messages and generate a new table
         in case there are too many warnings.

Patch 8: adds bin-search which should speed up TFRC reverse-lookup a little

Re: [PATCH 0/8]: 2 Bug fixes, all earlier patches revised

[Ian McDonald]

> Patches 3..8 correspond to the earlier TFRC patches (much smaller now):
>      Ian I would appreciate if you could have a look at these.
>      I have put in effort to explain them clearer. While the performance still
>      is bad, these are a step forward. In particular, the parameter checking is
>      useful to have.  Should it be needed, I have documented all everything on
>      http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gerrit/dccp/tfrc_documentation/doc/
>
If all the patches could be put into a git tree or alternatively on
Gerrit's website saying which tree they work against then I will test
early next week. I can't review patches at the moment - if I get spare
time I might review some over weekend but no promise.
-- 
Web: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4
Blog: http://imcdnzl.blogspot.com
WAND Network Research Group

Re: [PATCH 0/8]: 2 Bug fixes, all earlier patches revised

[Gerrit Renker]

|  If all the patches could be put into a git tree or alternatively on
|  Gerrit's website saying which tree they work against

The TFRC patches are 13a ... 13f on 

  http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gerrit/dccp/patch-backlog/

and they apply on davem-2.6.20 as of today and on acme-2.6.20 as well.

The bug fixes are 10a / 10b, the two earlier patches are 05a and 05b.

Re: [PATCH 0/8]: 2 Bug fixes, all earlier patches revised

[Ian McDonald]

On 12/2/06, Gerrit Renker <gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk> wrote:
> I have been doing bug hunting almost all day, two bug fixes are enclosed,
> for the remainder I am willing to stick my head into the code next week
> until the performance is up to a reasonable level and most of the known
> bugs are ironed out.
>
> I went through the earlier patches and tossed out some material and re-arranged
> the TFRC lookup stuff in a different way. I think it is now much easier to read.
>
>
OK. I think I have reviewed all the outstanding patches. Will help
with performance testing next week. Tell me if I've missed any you
wanted me to look at.

Great work Gerrit. Appreciate it.

Ian
-- 
Web: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4
Blog: http://imcdnzl.blogspot.com
WAND Network Research Group

Re: [PATCH 0/8]: 2 Bug fixes, all earlier patches revised

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 12:00:05PM +1300, Ian McDonald wrote:
> On 12/2/06, Gerrit Renker <gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk> wrote:
> >I have been doing bug hunting almost all day, two bug fixes are enclosed,
> >for the remainder I am willing to stick my head into the code next week
> >until the performance is up to a reasonable level and most of the known
> >bugs are ironed out.
> >
> >I went through the earlier patches and tossed out some material and 
> >re-arranged
> >the TFRC lookup stuff in a different way. I think it is now much easier to 
> >read.
> >
> >
> OK. I think I have reviewed all the outstanding patches. Will help
> with performance testing next week. Tell me if I've missed any you
> wanted me to look at.
> 
> Great work Gerrit. Appreciate it.

And I appreciate you review work, thanks a lot, will take a second look
at the ones you've just acked and put them in my tree.

- Arnaldo