From: Thomas Graf <tgraf@infradead.org>
To: Vladislav Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@hp.com>
Cc: Sridhar Samudrala <sri@us.ibm.com>,
linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sctp: Reducing rwnd by sizeof(struct sk_buff) for each CHUNK is too aggressive
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 11:53:16 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110624155316.GD9222@canuck.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E04AB67.1040407@hp.com>
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:21:11AM -0400, Vladislav Yasevich wrote:
> First, let me state that I mis-understood what the patch is attempting to do.
> Looking again, I understand this a little better, but still have reservations.
This explains a lot :)
> If we treat the window as strictly available data, then we may end up sending a lot more traffic
> then the window can take thus causing us to enter 0 window probe and potential retransmission
> issues that will trigger congestion control.
> We'd like to avoid that so we put some overhead into our computations. It may not be ideal
> since we do this on a per-chunk basis. It could probably be done on per-packet basis instead.
> This way, we'll essentially over-estimate but under-subscribe our current view of the peers
> window. So in one shot, we are not going to over-fill it and will get an updated view next
> time the SACK arrives.
I will update my patch to include a per packet overhead and also fix the retransmission
rwnd reopening to do the same.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-24 15:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-24 10:15 [PATCH] sctp: Reducing rwnd by sizeof(struct sk_buff) for each CHUNK is too aggressive Thomas Graf
2011-06-24 13:48 ` Vladislav Yasevich
2011-06-24 14:42 ` Thomas Graf
2011-06-24 15:21 ` Vladislav Yasevich
2011-06-24 15:53 ` Thomas Graf [this message]
2011-06-27 9:11 ` Thomas Graf
2011-06-29 14:09 ` Vladislav Yasevich
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=20110624155316.GD9222@canuck.infradead.org \
--to=tgraf@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sri@us.ibm.com \
--cc=vladislav.yasevich@hp.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).