From: Itzcak Pechtalt <itzcak@flashnetworks.com>
To: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com>,
Nandita Dukkipati <nanditad@google.com>
Cc: Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net] tcp: Fix TLP implementation in case receive window limits send
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2014 14:26:50 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3c8ec45dd7454b0cbcd47aabb03be969@AM3PR06MB388.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADVnQy=KofBtktTj+ZW6ZzbkoAxdq_Ks8sehdtQNbO00EbvfdQ@mail.gmail.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Neal Cardwell [mailto:ncardwell@google.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2014 10:25 PM
> To: Nandita Dukkipati
> Cc: Yuchung Cheng; Itzcak Pechtalt; netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net] tcp: Fix TLP implementation in case receive
> window limits send
>
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 3:00 PM, Nandita Dukkipati
> <nanditad@google.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Itzcak Pechtalt
> >> <itzcak@flashnetworks.com> wrote:
> >>> From: Itzcak Pechtalt <itzcak@flashnetworks.com>
> >>>
> >>> TCP Tail loss probe (TLP) algorithm implementation has some problem.
> >>> According to paper (draft-dukkipati-tcpm-tcp-loss-probe-0 ):
> >>> In case recive window of receiver limits send of new packet in probe
> >>> time than a retransmit of last packet send should be done.
> >>>
> >>> Actually, return code from tcp_write_xmit is not checked and only
> >>> RTO is scheduled, So, it will take more time for reovery in this
> >>> case than without TLP.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Itzcak Pechtalt <itzcak@flashnetworks.com>
> >> Acked-by: Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com>
> > Acked-by: Nandita Dukkipati <nanditad@google.com>
>
> Acked-by: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com>
>
> BTW, Itzcak, have you been able to construct a test case where this patch
> now allows a TLP in a case where the sender is limited by the receive
> window?
>
> Often we will be prevented from doing any kind of TLP if we are limited by
> the receive window, due to these lines in
> tcp_schedule_loss_probe():
>
> if ((tp->snd_cwnd > tcp_packets_in_flight(tp)) &&
> tcp_send_head(sk))
> return false;
>
> But there is something else going on as well, since I haven't been able to
> force a TLP even when cwnd == rwin == tcp_packets_in_flight() == 10. But I
> haven't had much time to spend on it.
>
> neal
The scenario will be in case the sender process calls "send" per packet size data,
so when tcp_schedule_loss_probe is called there is no additional data
(tcp_send_head(sk)) returns false), but further calls to send fail due to receive
window limit (The same is right if data bulk size ended exactly with receive
window limit).
But really I can't understand what is the goal of the above 3 lines of code.
If send was stopped from any reason, why not schedule TLP timer?
Anyway next send will clear the timer by tcp_event_new_data_sent function.
What is your opinion about another patch to remove these 3 lines of code?
Itzcak
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-28 14:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-23 16:28 [PATCH net] tcp: Fix TLP implementation in case receive window limits send Itzcak Pechtalt
2014-09-23 17:52 ` Yuchung Cheng
2014-09-23 17:54 ` Yuchung Cheng
2014-09-24 18:54 ` Yuchung Cheng
2014-09-24 19:00 ` Nandita Dukkipati
2014-09-24 19:25 ` Neal Cardwell
2014-09-28 14:26 ` Itzcak Pechtalt [this message]
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=3c8ec45dd7454b0cbcd47aabb03be969@AM3PR06MB388.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com \
--to=itzcak@flashnetworks.com \
--cc=nanditad@google.com \
--cc=ncardwell@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ycheng@google.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