netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
To: Joris van Rantwijk <joris@jorisvr.nl>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Question about LRO/GRO and TCP acknowledgements
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 04:43:44 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1307850224.22348.626.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110611215919.5fc29c27@konijn>

On Sat, 2011-06-11 at 21:59 +0200, Joris van Rantwijk wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm trying to understand how Linux produces TCP acknowledgements
> for segments received via LRO/GRO.
> 
> As far as I can see, the network driver uses GRO to collect several
> received packets into one big super skb, which is then handled
> during just one call to tcp_v4_rcv(). This will eventually result
> in the sending of at most one ACK packet for the entire GRO packet.
> 
> Conventional wisdom (RFC 5681) says that a receiver should send at
> least one ACK for every two data segments received. The sending TCP
> needs these ACKs to update its congestion window (e.g. slow start).
> 
> It seems to me that the current implementation in Linux may send
> just one ACK for a large number of received segments. This would
> be a deviation from the standard. As a result the congestion
> window of the sender would grow much slower than intended.

This was a problem in older versions of Linux (and still is on other
network stacks that aren't aware of LRO).

> Maybe I misunderstand something in the network code (likely).
> Could someone please explain me how this ACK issue is handled?

LRO implementations (and GRO) are expected to put the actual segment
size in skb_shared_info(skb)->gso_size on the aggregated skb.  TCP will
then use that rather than the aggregated payload size when deciding
whether to defer an ACK.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.


  reply	other threads:[~2011-06-12  4:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-11 19:59 Question about LRO/GRO and TCP acknowledgements Joris van Rantwijk
2011-06-12  3:43 ` Ben Hutchings [this message]
2011-06-12  7:51   ` Joris van Rantwijk
2011-06-12  9:07     ` Eric Dumazet
2011-06-12  9:30       ` Joris van Rantwijk
2011-06-12 10:48         ` Eric Dumazet
2011-06-12 11:24           ` Joris van Rantwijk
2011-06-12 12:01             ` Alexander Zimmermann
2011-06-12 14:57             ` Eric Dumazet
2011-06-12 19:37               ` Joris van Rantwijk
2011-06-14 10:53                 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2011-06-14 19:37                   ` Joris van Rantwijk
2011-06-13 17:55               ` Rick Jones
2011-06-13 17:34 ` Rick Jones

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=1307850224.22348.626.camel@localhost \
    --to=bhutchings@solarflare.com \
    --cc=joris@jorisvr.nl \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).