From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: netif_rx packet dumping
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 13:32:37 -0800
Message-ID: <20050303133237.5d64578f.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <20050303123811.4d934249@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net>
	<20050303125556.6850cfe5.davem@davemloft.net>
	<1109884688.1090.282.camel@jzny.localdomain>
	<20050303132143.7eef517c@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net>
	<1109885065.1098.285.camel@jzny.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: shemminger@osdl.org, rhee@eos.ncsu.edu, jheffner@psc.edu,
        Yee-Ting.Li@nuim.ie, baruch@ev-en.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com
To: hadi@cyberus.ca
In-Reply-To: <1109885065.1098.285.camel@jzny.localdomain>
Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

On 03 Mar 2005 16:24:25 -0500
jamal <hadi@cyberus.ca> wrote:

> Ok, this does sound more reasonable. Out of curiosity, are packets being
> dropped at the socket queue? Why is "dump till empty" behaviour screwing
> over TCP.

Because it does the same thing tail-drop in routers do.
It makes everything back off a lot and go into slow start.
If we'd just drop 1 packet per flow or something like that
(so it could be fixed with a quick fast retransmit), TCP
would avoid regressing into slow start.

You say "use a NAPI driver", but netif_rx() _IS_ a NAPI driver.
process_backlog() adheres to quotas and every other stabilizing
effect NAPI drivers use, the only missing part is the RX interrupt
disabling.

We should eliminate the max backlog thing completely.  There is
no need for it.