All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
To: Daniel Baluta <dbaluta@ixiacom.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	eric.dumazet@gmail.com, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, jmorris@namei.org,
	yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, kaber@trash.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	luto@amacapital.net
Subject: Re: [RFC v2] tcp: Export TCP Delayed ACK parameters to user
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 11:10:15 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EAEE487.5080905@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEnQRZCggUnoVZXyXfZ6-Om+hwQL_6Oo3dPODsXAH+iJYqN=jw@mail.gmail.com>

Whether tracked as bytes or segments, my take is that to ask 
applications to have to think about another non-portable socket option 
is ungood.  I would suggest taking the time to work-out the automagic 
heuristic to drop the deferred ACK count on connections where it being 
large is un-desirable and then not need to worry about the limits being 
global.

Given the stack's existing propensity to try to decide when to increase 
the window I might even go so far as to suggest the sense of the 
heuristic be flipped and it seek to decide when it is ok to increase the 
number of segments/bytes per ACK.  To what extent one needs to go beyond 
what happens already with the stretching of ACKs via GRO/LRO or if that 
mechanism can serve as part of the logic of the heuristic is probably a 
fertile area for discussion.

If I recall correctly, in one of your earlier posts you mentioned 
something about a 20% performance boost.  What were the specific 
conditions of that testing?  Was it over a setup where the receiver 
already had LRO/GRO or was it over a more plain receiver NIC without 
that functionality?

rick jones

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-10-31 18:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-10-27 23:07 [RFC] tcp: Export TCP Delayed ACK parameters to user Daniel Baluta
2011-10-28  0:01 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-10-28  8:01   ` Daniel Baluta
2011-10-28  8:44     ` Eric Dumazet
2011-10-28 16:38       ` Rick Jones
2011-10-28 21:14 ` [RFC v2] " Daniel Baluta
2011-10-28 21:19   ` David Miller
2011-10-28 21:35     ` Daniel Baluta
2011-10-28 22:31       ` David Miller
2011-10-28 22:40         ` Rick Jones
2011-10-29  2:24           ` David Miller
2011-10-29 12:32             ` Daniel Baluta
2011-10-30  4:13               ` David Miller
2011-10-31 18:10               ` Rick Jones [this message]
2011-10-31 20:02                 ` Daniel Baluta
2011-10-31 21:29                   ` Rick Jones
2011-10-28 21:53   ` Andy Lutomirski

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=4EAEE487.5080905@hp.com \
    --to=rick.jones2@hp.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dbaluta@ixiacom.com \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=kaber@trash.net \
    --cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org \
    /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.