From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/7] tcp: implement rb-tree based retransmit
 queue
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 07:09:04 -0800
Message-ID: <1516806544.3715.18.camel@gmail.com>
References: <20171006052127.19913-1-edumazet@google.com>
         <20171007.003134.133270352885522371.davem@davemloft.net>
         <0d6ba40c-8c17-5d43-f4a1-359ce65d961f@mellanox.com>
         <CANn89i+k0jYm=thJZ66ZJh2ryc222jfmRi_AxVZt8uNE2QMJMA@mail.gmail.com>
         <e2d2db0f-94d7-dc1e-f99c-b419d50fbdcc@mellanox.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        "ncardwell@google.com" <ncardwell@google.com>,
        "ycheng@google.com" <ycheng@google.com>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@mellanox.com>,
        Amir Ancel <amira@mellanox.com>
To: Tal Gilboa <talgi@mellanox.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-pf0-f170.google.com ([209.85.192.170]:46357 "EHLO
        mail-pf0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S933948AbeAXPJH (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 24 Jan 2018 10:09:07 -0500
Received: by mail-pf0-f170.google.com with SMTP id y5so3258381pff.13
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 07:09:07 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <e2d2db0f-94d7-dc1e-f99c-b419d50fbdcc@mellanox.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, 2018-01-24 at 16:42 +0200, Tal Gilboa wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> My choice of words in my comment was misplaced, and I apologies. It 
> completely missed the point. I understand, of course, the importance of 
> optimizing real-life scenarios.
> 
> We are currently evaluating this patch and if/how it might affect our 
> customers. We would also evaluate your suggestion below.
> 
> We will contact you if and when we have a real concern.
> Thanks.

Sure, I am curious how a 50% regression can be possible as a matter of
fact, so please update even if this caused by some specific synthetic
test conditions.

Thanks.