From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: gallatin@myri.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, ossthema@de.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LRO ack aggregation
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 11:45:54 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47433972.10903@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071119.210919.177660672.davem@davemloft.net>
David Miller wrote:
> From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@myri.com>
> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:11:55 -0400
>
>
>>I've attached a patch which adds support to inet_lro for aggregating
>>pure acks.
>
>
> I've applied this patch to net-2.6.25... but!
>
> This needs some serious thinking. What this patch ends up doing is creating
> big stretch-ACKs, and those can hurt performance.
>
> Stretch ACKs are particularly harmful when either the receiver is cpu
> weak (lacking enough cpu power to fill the pipe completely no matter
> what optimizations are applied) or when there is packet loss (less
> feedback information and ACK clocking).
>
> It also means that the sender will be more bursty, because it will now
> swallow ACKs covering huge portions of the send window, and then have
> large chunks of it's send queue it can send out all at once.
>
> Fundamentally, I really don't like this change, it batches to the
> point where it begins to erode the natural ACK clocking of TCP, and I
> therefore am very likely to revert it before merging to Linus.
Sounds like one might as well go ahead and implement HP-UX/Solaris-like
ACK sending avoidance at the receiver and not bother with LRO-ACK on the
sender.
In some experiements a while back I thought I saw that LRO on the
receiver was causing him to send fewer ACKs already? IIRC that was with
a Myricom card, perhaps I was fooled by it's own ACK LRO it was doing.
rick jones
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-20 19:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-23 15:11 [PATCH] LRO ack aggregation Andrew Gallatin
2007-11-20 5:09 ` David Miller
2007-11-20 6:09 ` Herbert Xu
2007-11-20 6:22 ` David Miller
2007-11-20 11:47 ` Andrew Gallatin
2007-11-20 11:55 ` David Miller
2007-11-20 13:27 ` Andrew Gallatin
2007-11-20 13:35 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-11-20 13:50 ` Herbert Xu
2007-11-20 14:03 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-11-20 14:08 ` Herbert Xu
2007-11-20 14:37 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-11-21 6:15 ` Bill Fink
2007-11-20 19:45 ` Rick Jones [this message]
2007-11-20 22:27 ` David 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=47433972.10903@hp.com \
--to=rick.jones2@hp.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gallatin@myri.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ossthema@de.ibm.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.