From: Grant Zhang <gzhang@fastly.com>
To: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com>
Cc: Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Subject: Re: Recurring trace from tcp_fragment()
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2015 09:35:04 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55707E38.4090506@fastly.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADVnQymCSGyyOqdO2HOap+_6zsfy99-3CbgxnQTfGakRYNoteQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 819 bytes --]
Hi Neal,
Unfortunately with the patch we still see the same stack trace. Attached
is the TcpExtTCPSACKReneging with the patch, captured with 60 seconds
interval. Its value is incremented at an similar speed as before, about
30/minute.
If you want to collect any other data, please feel free to let me know.
Thanks,
Grant
On 5/30/15 4:08 PM, Neal Cardwell wrote:
> On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Grant Zhang <gzhang@fastly.com> wrote:
>> Thank you Neal. Most likely I will test the patch on Monday and report
>> back the result.
>>
>> As for the TcpExtTCPSACKReneging counter, attached is the captured
>> counter value on a 1-second interval for 10 minutes.
>
> OK, great. Those TcpExtTCPSACKReneging values look consistent with the
> theory underlying the patch, so that's a good sign.
>
> Thanks!
>
> neal
>
[-- Attachment #2: reneg_patch.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 5280 bytes --]
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 489 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 504 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 523 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 544 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 565 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 573 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 589 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 621 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 632 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 646 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 657 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 696 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 720 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 735 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 758 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 784 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 823 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 833 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 857 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 882 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 916 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 925 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 947 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 960 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1011 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1044 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1070 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1079 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1096 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1122 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1127 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1164 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1197 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1216 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1233 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1287 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1317 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1330 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1343 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1369 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1392 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1411 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1426 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1471 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1482 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1501 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1541 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1558 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1575 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1652 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1737 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1765 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1789 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1823 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1862 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1887 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1901 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1919 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1941 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1962 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 1989 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2019 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2057 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2078 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2100 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2185 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2246 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2285 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2313 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2337 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2363 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2414 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2559 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2593 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2607 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2714 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2830 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2953 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 2986 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3030 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3049 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3073 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3094 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3141 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3195 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3263 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3300 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3348 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3412 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3475 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3522 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3581 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3627 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3674 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3732 0.0
TcpExtTCPSACKReneging 3785 0.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-04 16:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-29 19:21 Recurring trace from tcp_fragment() Grant Zhang
2015-05-29 19:46 ` Neal Cardwell
2015-05-29 19:53 ` Grant Zhang
2015-05-30 17:29 ` Neal Cardwell
2015-05-30 18:52 ` Grant Zhang
2015-05-30 23:08 ` Neal Cardwell
2015-06-04 16:35 ` Grant Zhang [this message]
2015-06-04 19:34 ` Neal Cardwell
2015-06-04 19:38 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2015-06-04 20:10 ` Grant Zhang
2015-06-04 20:56 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2015-06-04 21:29 ` Yuchung Cheng
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=55707E38.4090506@fastly.com \
--to=gzhang@fastly.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=ncardwell@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ycheng@google.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.