From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: tcp_process_frto() should not set snd_cwnd to 0
Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2013 09:32:57 -0800
Message-ID: <1359826377.30177.86.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
References: <20130123161238.GE8912@reaktio.net>
	 <20130123214445.GA16641@order.stressinduktion.org>
	 <20130123215151.GF8912@reaktio.net>
	 <20130123152642.4a8389ba@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net>
	 <20130123234116.GC16641@order.stressinduktion.org>
	 <1358984831.12374.1227.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
	 <20130124135120.GD16641@order.stressinduktion.org>
	 <1359777110.30177.58.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
	 <20130202142832.GP8912@reaktio.net>
	 <1359818075.30177.78.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
	 <CADVnQykbufy-kQrEnJm0bbt=n7C8OfE1=Kr-2KfP7Mbu5Eq58w@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Pasi =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=E4rkk=E4inen?= <pasik@iki.fi>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
	Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com>
To: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-da0-f44.google.com ([209.85.210.44]:42576 "EHLO
	mail-da0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1757803Ab3BBRdA (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Sat, 2 Feb 2013 12:33:00 -0500
Received: by mail-da0-f44.google.com with SMTP id z20so2116301dae.3
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Sat, 02 Feb 2013 09:32:59 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CADVnQykbufy-kQrEnJm0bbt=n7C8OfE1=Kr-2KfP7Mbu5Eq58w@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Sat, 2013-02-02 at 10:57 -0500, Neal Cardwell wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
> > diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> > index 8aca4ee..37760df 100644
> > --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> > +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> > @@ -3506,7 +3506,7 @@ static bool tcp_process_frto(struct sock *sk, int flag)
> >                 if (!(flag & FLAG_DATA_ACKED) && (tp->frto_counter == 1)) {
> >                         /* Prevent sending of new data. */
> >                         tp->snd_cwnd = min(tp->snd_cwnd,
> > -                                          tcp_packets_in_flight(tp));
> > +                                          max(tcp_packets_in_flight(tp), 1U));
> >                         return true;
> >                 }
> 
> This seems better than what we have now, but it seems to paper over a
> significant bug somewhere in FRTO. If we are at this spot and
> tcp_packets_in_flight() is zero, then this means that we have lost our
> chance to disambiguate whether this loss timeout was spurious, and we
> should assume it was a legit loss, so we should call:
>     tcp_enter_frto_loss(sk, 2, flag);
> 
> One possible approach (please excuse the formatting for this informal proposal):
> 
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> index 0905997..66f7c32 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> @@ -3482,7 +3482,8 @@ static bool tcp_process_frto(struct sock *sk, int flag)
>      ((tp->frto_counter >= 2) && (flag & FLAG_RETRANS_DATA_ACKED)))
>   tp->undo_marker = 0;
> 
> - if (!before(tp->snd_una, tp->frto_highmark)) {
> + if (!before(tp->snd_una, tp->frto_highmark) ||
> +    !tcp_packets_in_flight(tp)) {
>   tcp_enter_frto_loss(sk, (tp->frto_counter == 1 ? 2 : 3), flag);
>   return true;
>   }

Thanks Neal for this suggestion, I'll make tests before submitting an
official patch.