From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
To: netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: design for TSO performance fix
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:51:31 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <41F98C93.9040005@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050127163146.33b01e95.davem@davemloft.net>
David S. Miller wrote:
> Ok, here is the best idea I've been able to come up with
> so far.
>
> The basic idea is that we stop trying to build TSO frames
> in the actual transmit queue. Instead, TSO packets are
> built impromptu when we actually output packets on the
> transmit queue.
>
> Advantages:
>
> 1) No knowledge of TSO frames need exist anywhere besides
> tcp_write_xmit(), tcp_transmit_skb(), and
> tcp_xmit_retransmit_queue()
>
> 2) As a result of #1, all the pcount crap goes away.
> The need for two MSS state variables (mss_cache,
> and mss_cache_std) and assosciated complexity is
> eliminated as well.
>
> 3) Keeping TSO enabled after packet loss "just works".
Doubleplusgood.
>
> 4) CWND sampled at the correct moment when deciding
> the TSO packet arity.
>
> The one disadvantage is that it might be a tiny bit more
> expensive to build TSO frames. But I am sure we can find
> ways to optimize that quite well.
>
> The main element of the TSO output logic is a function
> that is schemed as follows:
>
> ...
>
> If tcp_tso_build() fails, the caller just falls back to the
> normal path of sending the frames non-TSO one-by-one.
>
> The logic is simple because if TSO is being done we know
> that all of the SKB data is paged (since SG+CSUM is a
> requirement for TSO). The one case where that
> invariant might fail is due to a routing change (previous
> device cannot do SG+CSUM, new device has full TSO capability)
> and that is handled via the tcp_skb_data_all_paged() checks.
>
> My thinking is that whatever added expensive this new scheme
> has, is offset by the simplifications the rest of the TCP
> stack will have since it will no longer need to know anything
> about multiple MSS values and packet counts.
>
> Comments?
Does anything (need to) change wrt getting the size of the TSO's to increase as
cwnd increases?
rick jones
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-01-28 0:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-01-28 0:31 design for TSO performance fix David S. Miller
2005-01-28 0:51 ` Rick Jones [this message]
2005-01-28 0:58 ` David S. Miller
2005-01-28 1:31 ` Herbert Xu
2005-01-28 5:19 ` David S. Miller
2005-01-28 5:44 ` Herbert Xu
2005-01-28 19:28 ` David S. Miller
2005-01-29 10:12 ` Herbert Xu
2005-01-28 1:57 ` Thomas Graf
2005-02-01 23:04 ` David S. Miller
2005-01-28 6:25 ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-28 6:44 ` Nivedita Singhvi
2005-01-28 19:30 ` David S. Miller
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=41F98C93.9040005@hp.com \
--to=rick.jones2@hp.com \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.