From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: gallatin@myri.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, ossthema@de.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LRO ack aggregation
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 11:45:54 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47433972.10903@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071119.210919.177660672.davem@davemloft.net>
David Miller wrote:
> From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@myri.com>
> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:11:55 -0400
>
>
>>I've attached a patch which adds support to inet_lro for aggregating
>>pure acks.
>
>
> I've applied this patch to net-2.6.25... but!
>
> This needs some serious thinking. What this patch ends up doing is creating
> big stretch-ACKs, and those can hurt performance.
>
> Stretch ACKs are particularly harmful when either the receiver is cpu
> weak (lacking enough cpu power to fill the pipe completely no matter
> what optimizations are applied) or when there is packet loss (less
> feedback information and ACK clocking).
>
> It also means that the sender will be more bursty, because it will now
> swallow ACKs covering huge portions of the send window, and then have
> large chunks of it's send queue it can send out all at once.
>
> Fundamentally, I really don't like this change, it batches to the
> point where it begins to erode the natural ACK clocking of TCP, and I
> therefore am very likely to revert it before merging to Linus.
Sounds like one might as well go ahead and implement HP-UX/Solaris-like
ACK sending avoidance at the receiver and not bother with LRO-ACK on the
sender.
In some experiements a while back I thought I saw that LRO on the
receiver was causing him to send fewer ACKs already? IIRC that was with
a Myricom card, perhaps I was fooled by it's own ACK LRO it was doing.
rick jones
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-20 19:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-23 15:11 [PATCH] LRO ack aggregation Andrew Gallatin
2007-11-20 5:09 ` David Miller
2007-11-20 6:09 ` Herbert Xu
2007-11-20 6:22 ` David Miller
2007-11-20 11:47 ` Andrew Gallatin
2007-11-20 11:55 ` David Miller
2007-11-20 13:27 ` Andrew Gallatin
2007-11-20 13:35 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-11-20 13:50 ` Herbert Xu
2007-11-20 14:03 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-11-20 14:08 ` Herbert Xu
2007-11-20 14:37 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-11-21 6:15 ` Bill Fink
2007-11-20 19:45 ` Rick Jones [this message]
2007-11-20 22:27 ` David Miller
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=47433972.10903@hp.com \
--to=rick.jones2@hp.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gallatin@myri.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ossthema@de.ibm.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).