From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, ncardwell@google.com, edumazet@google.com,
nanditad@google.com, ilpo.jarvinen@cs.helsinki.fi,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: remove bad timeout logic in fast recovery
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 18:46:43 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1368841603.3301.131.camel@edumazet-glaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1368834305-29849-1-git-send-email-ycheng@google.com>
On Fri, 2013-05-17 at 16:45 -0700, Yuchung Cheng wrote:
> tcp_timeout_skb() was intended to trigger fast recovery on timeout,
> unfortunately in reality it often causes spurious retransmission
> storms during fast recovery. The particular sign is fast retransmit
> over highest sacked sequence (SND.FACK).
>
> Currently the RTO timer re-arming (as in RFC6298) offers a nice cushion
> to avoid spurious timeout: when SND.UNA advances the sender re-arms
> RTO and extends the timeout by icsk_rto. The sender does not offset
> the time elapsed since the packet at SND.UNA was sent.
>
> But if the next (DUP)ACK arrives later than ~RTTVAR and triggers
> tcp_fastretrans_alert(), then tcp_timeout_skb() will mark any packet
> sent before icsk_rto interval lost, including one that's above the
> highest sacked sequence. Most likely a large part of scorebard will
> be marked.
>
> If most packets are not lost then the subsequence DUPACKs with new
> SACK blockes will cause the sender to continue retransmit packets
> beyond SND.FACK spuriously right. Even only one packet is lost the
> sender may falsely retransmit almost the entire window.
>
> The situation becomes common in the world of bufferbloat: the RTT
> continues to grow as the queue builds up but RTTVAR remains small and
> close to the minimum 200ms. If a data packet is lost and the DUPACK
> triggered by the next data packet is slightly delayed, then a spurious
> retransmission storm forms.
>
> As the original comment on tcp_timeout_skb() suggests: the usefulness
> of this feature is questionable. It also wastes cycles walking the
> sack scoreboard and is actually harmful because of the false recovery.
> It's time to remove this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com>
> ---
> include/linux/tcp.h | 1 -
> include/net/tcp.h | 1 -
> net/ipv4/tcp_input.c | 65 +---------------------------------------------------
> 3 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 66 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-18 1:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-17 23:45 [PATCH net-next] tcp: remove bad timeout logic in fast recovery Yuchung Cheng
2013-05-18 1:46 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2013-05-18 3:17 ` Neal Cardwell
2013-05-18 5:52 ` Nandita Dukkipati
2013-05-20 6:51 ` David Miller
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=1368841603.3301.131.camel@edumazet-glaptop \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=ilpo.jarvinen@cs.helsinki.fi \
--cc=nanditad@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox