From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: make TCP quick ACK behavior modifiable Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 15:23:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20100823.152330.184822588.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20100823220129.GB2745@nuttenaction> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: hagen@jauu.net, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi, acme@redhat.com, shemminger@vyatta.com To: chris.snook@gmail.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:45113 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753912Ab0HWWXN (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Aug 2010 18:23:13 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Chris Snook Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 18:19:45 -0400 > Just because we've allowed stupid TCP sysctls in the past does not > mean we should continue to do so now. We recently made delayed ack a > per-route tunable, so consistency would suggest we do the same here. > Per-route tunables are more flexible, and as with the delayed ack > patch, there are use cases where that granularity gives a clear > advantage over a sysctl. For example, you may want to disable quick > ack on a high-MTU path and enable it on a low-MTU path. > > If you need a hint for how to implement the per-route tunable, look > for the delayed ack patch from early 2009. I completely agree with Chris that this should be a per-route rather than a global sysctl tunable.