From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@jauu.net>
Cc: Benoit Sigoure <tsunanet@gmail.com>,
davem@davemloft.net, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, pekkas@netcore.fi,
jmorris@namei.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, kaber@trash.net,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: Expose the initial RTO via a new sysctl.
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 14:20:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1305634823.2850.90.camel@edumazet-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e6b52d895fca947b4cce2896d593619b@localhost>
Le mardi 17 mai 2011 à 13:02 +0200, Hagen Paul Pfeifer a écrit :
> On Tue, 17 May 2011 10:07:57 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> > I wont discuss if introducing a new sysctl is welcomed, only on patch
> > issues. I believe some work in IETF is done to reduce the 3sec value to
> > 1sec anyway.
>
> Why not?
Just because I let this point to David and others. I personally dont
care that much.
> I though all new knobs in this area should be done on a per route
> metric so it can be controlled on a per path basis. RTO should be
> adjustable on a per path basis, because it depends on the path.
>
Adding many knobs to each clone had a huge cost on previous kernels.
(Think some machines have millions entries in IP route cache), this used
quite a lot of memory.
With latest David work, we'll consume less ram, because we can now share
settings, instead of copying them on each dst entry.
> Some months back [1] I posted a patch to enable/disable TCP quick ack
> mode, which has nothing to do with network paths, just with a local server
> policy. But David rejected the patch with the argument that I should use a
> per path knob (this is a little bit inapprehensible for me, but David has
> the last word).
Well, if nobody speaks after David, he has the last word indeed.
BTW, I remember Stephen actually asked the per route thing, not David.
http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-netdev/2010/8/23/6283641
Then David also stated it :
http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-netdev/2010/8/23/6283678
If you really want tcp_quickack thing you really should do it as
requested by both Stephen & David ;)
Unfortunately, I dont know if its really needed or worthwhile.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-17 12:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-17 7:40 [PATCH] tcp: Expose the initial RTO via a new sysctl Benoit Sigoure
2011-05-17 7:40 ` Benoit Sigoure
2011-05-17 8:01 ` Alexander Zimmermann
2011-05-17 8:34 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-17 8:07 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-05-17 11:02 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2011-05-17 12:20 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2011-05-18 10:43 ` Benoit Sigoure
2011-05-18 19:26 ` David Miller
2011-05-18 19:40 ` tsuna
2011-05-18 19:52 ` David Miller
2011-05-18 20:20 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2011-05-18 20:23 ` David Miller
2011-05-18 20:27 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2011-05-20 10:27 ` H.K. Jerry Chu
2011-05-20 11:00 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2011-05-20 12:37 ` Alan Cox
2011-05-21 0:06 ` H.K. Jerry Chu
2011-05-31 14:48 ` tsuna
2011-05-31 15:25 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2011-05-31 15:28 ` tsuna
2011-05-31 15:43 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2011-05-19 2:22 ` [PATCH] tcp: Implement a two-level initial RTO as per draft RFC 2988bis-02 Benoit Sigoure
2011-05-19 2:36 ` David Miller
2011-05-19 3:56 ` tsuna
2011-05-19 4:14 ` David Miller
2011-05-19 4:33 ` tsuna
2011-05-19 5:46 ` David Miller
2011-05-19 6:36 ` [PATCH] tcp: Lower the initial RTO to 1s " Benoit Sigoure
2011-05-19 17:42 ` Yuchung Cheng
2011-05-19 6:47 ` Benoit Sigoure
2011-05-19 20:16 ` David Miller
2011-05-19 6:10 ` [PATCH] tcp: Implement a two-level initial RTO " Alexander Zimmermann
2011-05-19 6:25 ` tsuna
2011-05-19 6:36 ` Alexander Zimmermann
2011-05-19 6:42 ` tsuna
2011-05-19 6:52 ` Alexander Zimmermann
2011-05-19 7:07 ` tsuna
2011-05-19 8:02 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2011-05-19 16:40 ` tsuna
2011-05-19 16:55 ` Alexander Zimmermann
2011-05-19 17:11 ` tsuna
2011-05-19 19:27 ` David Miller
2011-05-19 20:30 ` tsuna
2011-05-20 2:01 ` [PATCH] tcp: Expose the initial RTO via a new sysctl H.K. Jerry Chu
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=1305634823.2850.90.camel@edumazet-laptop \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hagen@jauu.net \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pekkas@netcore.fi \
--cc=tsunanet@gmail.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox