[PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[fangxiaozhi 00110321]

From: fangxiaozhi <huananhu@huawei.com>
1. This patch is based on the kernel of 2.6.32-rc4 
2. In this patch, we enlarge the out buffer size to optimize the upload speed for the ppp connection. Then it can support the upload of HSUPA data cards.
Signed-off-by: fangxiaozhi <huananhu@huawei.com>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- a/drivers/net/ppp_async.c 2009-10-12 05:43:56.000000000 +0800
+++ b/drivers/net/ppp_async.c 2009-10-15 16:29:56.000000000 +0800
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
 
 #define PPP_VERSION "2.4.2"
 
-#define OBUFSIZE 256
+#define OBUFSIZE 4096
 
 /* Structure for storing local state. */
 struct asyncppp {


******************************************************************************************
 This email and its attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained here in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please notify the sender by phone or email
 immediately and delete it!
 *****************************************************************************************

Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[David Miller]

From: fangxiaozhi 00110321 <huananhu@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:19:02 +0800

> From: fangxiaozhi <huananhu@huawei.com>
> 1. This patch is based on the kernel of 2.6.32-rc4 
> 2. In this patch, we enlarge the out buffer size to optimize the upload speed for the ppp connection. Then it can support the upload of HSUPA data cards.
> Signed-off-by: fangxiaozhi <huananhu@huawei.com>

Your patch is broken, please don't wate my time like this.

+ git apply --check --whitespace=error-all diff
error: patch failed: drivers/net/ppp_async.c:36
error: drivers/net/ppp_async.c: patch does not apply

Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[William Allen Simpson]

David Miller wrote:
> Your patch is broken, please don't wate my time like this.
> 
> + git apply --check --whitespace=error-all diff
> error: patch failed: drivers/net/ppp_async.c:36
> error: drivers/net/ppp_async.c: patch does not apply
> 
What David may have meant, had he followed Documentation/ManagementStyle
or had any project management skills what-so-ever, is that you need to
follow Documentation/SubmittingPatches more carefully.

Look at 15) The canonical patch format

[PATCH 17/11] makes no sense, you don't have 11 patches, and the 17th
patch of 11 can never exist.

Need a better "subsystem: summary phrase", perhaps
   "net: PPP buffer too small for higher speed connections"

A marker line containing simply "---".

And your trailer boilerplate badly breaks the system, because it's
missing the SMTP email standard "--" line in front of it.

You'll get nicer formatting with 'git format-patch -o ~ HEAD~1' after you
do a 'git commit -a' on your git tree.

It takes some time, even for a simple 1 line fix like this....

Hope that helps.

Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[Jarek Poplawski]

On 17-11-2009 11:20, William Allen Simpson wrote:
> David Miller wrote:
>> Your patch is broken, please don't wate my time like this.
>>
>> + git apply --check --whitespace=error-all diff
>> error: patch failed: drivers/net/ppp_async.c:36
>> error: drivers/net/ppp_async.c: patch does not apply
>>
> What David may have meant, had he followed Documentation/ManagementStyle
> or had any project management skills what-so-ever, is that you need to
> follow Documentation/SubmittingPatches more carefully.

I think this time it was only about a missing tab ;-)

Jarek P.

> 
> Look at 15) The canonical patch format
> 
> [PATCH 17/11] makes no sense, you don't have 11 patches, and the 17th
> patch of 11 can never exist.
> 
> Need a better "subsystem: summary phrase", perhaps
>    "net: PPP buffer too small for higher speed connections"
> 
> A marker line containing simply "---".
> 
> And your trailer boilerplate badly breaks the system, because it's
> missing the SMTP email standard "--" line in front of it.
> 
> You'll get nicer formatting with 'git format-patch -o ~ HEAD~1' after you
> do a 'git commit -a' on your git tree.
> 
> It takes some time, even for a simple 1 line fix like this....
> 
> Hope that helps.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[William Allen Simpson]

Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On 17-11-2009 11:20, William Allen Simpson wrote:
>> David Miller wrote:
>>> Your patch is broken, please don't wate my time like this.
>>>
>>> + git apply --check --whitespace=error-all diff
>>> error: patch failed: drivers/net/ppp_async.c:36
>>> error: drivers/net/ppp_async.c: patch does not apply
>>>
>> What David may have meant, had he followed Documentation/ManagementStyle
>> or had any project management skills what-so-ever, is that you need to
>> follow Documentation/SubmittingPatches more carefully.
> 
> I think this time it was only about a missing tab ;-)
> 
In his inimitable inimical manner, comprehensively comprehensible. ;-)

Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[David Miller]

From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:20:09 -0500

> What David may have meant, had he followed
> Documentation/ManagementStyle or had any project management skills
> what-so-ever, is that you need to follow
> Documentation/SubmittingPatches more carefully.

Are personal attacks on me really necessary?

Do you want me to look closely at your patches with a high priority
when you submit them for inclusion?  If so, then you may want to
think twice about saying things like this.

You may be right, but that doesn't matter if you're interested in
working together with me in the future.  There are diplomatic ways to
do everything, and this wasn't one of those ways.

Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[Franko Fang]

Well, yes, I think that it misses the tab.

I will update the patch, and resubmit it again.

 Thanks for all  .
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jarek Poplawski" <jarkao2@gmail.com>
To: "William Allen Simpson" <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
Cc: <huananhu@huawei.com>; "David Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>; <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 7:14 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.


> On 17-11-2009 11:20, William Allen Simpson wrote:
>> David Miller wrote:
>>> Your patch is broken, please don't wate my time like this.
>>>
>>> + git apply --check --whitespace=error-all diff
>>> error: patch failed: drivers/net/ppp_async.c:36
>>> error: drivers/net/ppp_async.c: patch does not apply
>>>
>> What David may have meant, had he followed Documentation/ManagementStyle
>> or had any project management skills what-so-ever, is that you need to
>> follow Documentation/SubmittingPatches more carefully.
> 
> I think this time it was only about a missing tab ;-)
> 
> Jarek P.
> 
>> 
>> Look at 15) The canonical patch format
>> 
>> [PATCH 17/11] makes no sense, you don't have 11 patches, and the 17th
>> patch of 11 can never exist.
>> 
>> Need a better "subsystem: summary phrase", perhaps
>>    "net: PPP buffer too small for higher speed connections"
>> 
>> A marker line containing simply "---".
>> 
>> And your trailer boilerplate badly breaks the system, because it's
>> missing the SMTP email standard "--" line in front of it.
>> 
>> You'll get nicer formatting with 'git format-patch -o ~ HEAD~1' after you
>> do a 'git commit -a' on your git tree.
>> 
>> It takes some time, even for a simple 1 line fix like this....
>> 
>> Hope that helps.
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[Alexander Clouter]

William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> And your trailer boilerplate badly breaks the system, because it's
> missing the SMTP email standard "--" line in front of it.
> 
*ahem* s/^--$/^-- $/ *ahem*

Two hyphens followed by a space.

Cheers

-- 
Alexander Clouter
.sigmonster says: Everything you know is wrong!

Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[Valdis.Kletnieks]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 874 bytes --]

On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:20:09 EST, William Allen Simpson said:

> And your trailer boilerplate badly breaks the system, because it's
> missing the SMTP email standard "--" line in front of it.

Ahem.

It's not an 'SMTP standard' - in fact, SMTP doesn't even care diddly about the
user-visible *headers* in the mail, much less what the convention for a
signature block is.  If you get EHLO, MAIL FROM, RCPT TO, DATA, '.', and QUIT,
that's 95% of SMTP right there.  And none of it where normal users can even see
it (though the MAIL FROM can show up as Return-Path: sometimes).

The '-- ' *convention* isn't even at the next layer up, MIME.  If anything,
it's out at the liveware level (though some MUAs provide code to make it
a bit easier to deal with...)

(Feel free to cite RFC chapter-and-verse if you disagree, and note that
'Informational' RFCs are never standards. ;)


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 227 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[William Allen Simpson]

Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> The '-- ' *convention* isn't even at the next layer up, MIME.  If anything,
> it's out at the liveware level (though some MUAs provide code to make it
> a bit easier to deal with...)
> 
Hey Valdis, nice to hear from you....


> (Feel free to cite RFC chapter-and-verse if you disagree, and note that
> 'Informational' RFCs are never standards. ;)
> 
Yeah, a quick check shows it's mentioned in MIME RFC-1341 (June 1992), but
certainly going back to "Proposed standard for message encapsulation"
RFC-934 (January 1985) at the very least.  I seem to remember that Marshall
or Stef or somebody used it for digest sections too, but don't remember the
RFC number or a good search term.

Still, (relevance here) a convention observed for patches.

Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[William Allen Simpson]

David Miller wrote:
> From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:20:09 -0500
> 
>> What David may have meant, had he followed
>> Documentation/ManagementStyle or had any project management skills
>> what-so-ever, is that you need to follow
>> Documentation/SubmittingPatches more carefully.
> 
> Are personal attacks on me really necessary?
> 
Actually, ironic sarcasm (juxtaposition) is a form of humor, fairly
popular on such venues as "The Daily Show". :-)


> Do you want me to look closely at your patches with a high priority
> when you submit them for inclusion?
> 
Great, you're planning to start a new practice?  So far, I've only been
blessed with:

* 1st contact (Oct 2):

      "Otherwise asking for a is absolutely pointless as we have no
      context in which to judge the code you're showing us."

   The context (and entire previous patch) was pointed at by a link
   in the message, and an internet-draft, but that would have required
   effort (clicking and browsing).

   Not exactly what I'd call "look closely at your patches"....

* 2nd contact (Oct 5), replying to my post of Oct 3:

      "struct tcp_sock is already WAY TOO BIG on 64-bit systems, adding
      20 more bytes to it for some odd-ball feature is not something I'm
      willing to do, sorry."

   Always delighted to know our work is an "odd-ball feature"....

* 3rd contact, sending private email to you as maintainer, suggested by
   Andi Kleen's "On submitting kernel patches" for resolving conflicts,
   and getting flamed for sending private email to you!

* Recently, flamed for re-sending a query (after waiting 30 days):

      "Complaining that your work isn't getting looked at in a timely
      manner will always have the exact opposite effect that you want,
      it makes people have a smaller desire to look at your stuff."

   Yeah, 30 days just isn't long enough....  Fortunately, Eric Dumazet
   and Paul E. McKenney were really helpful (and others privately), and
   I thank them again!

* 2 days ago, flamed again for re-sending a patch (after waiting 5 days),
   although you'd never Ack'd or otherwise responded.


> You may be right, but that doesn't matter if you're interested in
> working together with me in the future.  There are diplomatic ways to
> do everything, and this wasn't one of those ways.
> 
Working *together* would be handy!  But that implies cooperation and
respect -- *not* biting the newbies nor dropping the F-bomb.

Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[Jarek Poplawski]

On 18-11-2009 06:04, William Allen Simpson wrote:
> David Miller wrote:
>> From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
>> Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:20:09 -0500
>>
>>> What David may have meant, had he followed
>>> Documentation/ManagementStyle or had any project management skills
>>> what-so-ever, is that you need to follow
>>> Documentation/SubmittingPatches more carefully.
>> Are personal attacks on me really necessary?
>>
> Actually, ironic sarcasm (juxtaposition) is a form of humor, fairly
> popular on such venues as "The Daily Show". :-)

Actually, it didn't work. But AFAIK adding "...NOT!" can make the
difference ;-)

Jarek P.

Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[Pavel Machek]

On Tue 2009-11-17 03:49:59, David Miller wrote:
> From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:20:09 -0500
> 
> > What David may have meant, had he followed
> > Documentation/ManagementStyle or had any project management skills
> > what-so-ever, is that you need to follow
> > Documentation/SubmittingPatches more carefully.
> 
> Are personal attacks on me really necessary?
> 
> Do you want me to look closely at your patches with a high priority
> when you submit them for inclusion?  If so, then you may want to
> think twice about saying things like this.

Was this kind of threats really neccessary?

									Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[Jarek Poplawski]

Pavel Machek wrote, On 11/21/2009 10:29 AM:

> On Tue 2009-11-17 03:49:59, David Miller wrote:
>> From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
>> Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:20:09 -0500
>>
>>> What David may have meant, had he followed
>>> Documentation/ManagementStyle or had any project management skills
>>> what-so-ever, is that you need to follow
>>> Documentation/SubmittingPatches more carefully.
>> Are personal attacks on me really necessary?
>>
>> Do you want me to look closely at your patches with a high priority
>> when you submit them for inclusion?  If so, then you may want to
>> think twice about saying things like this.
> 
> Was this kind of threats really neccessary?

What kind of threats do you recommend?

(And why at all do you call a threat doing something William misses,
and David asked for confirmation?)

Jarek P.

Re: [PATCH 17/11]Optimize the upload speed for PPP connection.

[David Miller]

From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 10:29:33 +0100

> On Tue 2009-11-17 03:49:59, David Miller wrote:
>> From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
>> Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:20:09 -0500
>> 
>> > What David may have meant, had he followed
>> > Documentation/ManagementStyle or had any project management skills
>> > what-so-ever, is that you need to follow
>> > Documentation/SubmittingPatches more carefully.
>> 
>> Are personal attacks on me really necessary?
>> 
>> Do you want me to look closely at your patches with a high priority
>> when you submit them for inclusion?  If so, then you may want to
>> think twice about saying things like this.
> 
> Was this kind of threats really neccessary?

It's not a threat, it's human nature.  People defer as much as
possible interactions with others they find unpleasant.