From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
To: Daniel Baluta <dbaluta@ixiacom.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
eric.dumazet@gmail.com, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, jmorris@namei.org,
yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, kaber@trash.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
luto@amacapital.net
Subject: Re: [RFC v2] tcp: Export TCP Delayed ACK parameters to user
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 11:10:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EAEE487.5080905@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEnQRZCggUnoVZXyXfZ6-Om+hwQL_6Oo3dPODsXAH+iJYqN=jw@mail.gmail.com>
Whether tracked as bytes or segments, my take is that to ask
applications to have to think about another non-portable socket option
is ungood. I would suggest taking the time to work-out the automagic
heuristic to drop the deferred ACK count on connections where it being
large is un-desirable and then not need to worry about the limits being
global.
Given the stack's existing propensity to try to decide when to increase
the window I might even go so far as to suggest the sense of the
heuristic be flipped and it seek to decide when it is ok to increase the
number of segments/bytes per ACK. To what extent one needs to go beyond
what happens already with the stretching of ACKs via GRO/LRO or if that
mechanism can serve as part of the logic of the heuristic is probably a
fertile area for discussion.
If I recall correctly, in one of your earlier posts you mentioned
something about a 20% performance boost. What were the specific
conditions of that testing? Was it over a setup where the receiver
already had LRO/GRO or was it over a more plain receiver NIC without
that functionality?
rick jones
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-31 18:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-27 23:07 [RFC] tcp: Export TCP Delayed ACK parameters to user Daniel Baluta
2011-10-28 0:01 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-10-28 8:01 ` Daniel Baluta
2011-10-28 8:44 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-10-28 16:38 ` Rick Jones
2011-10-28 21:14 ` [RFC v2] " Daniel Baluta
2011-10-28 21:19 ` David Miller
2011-10-28 21:35 ` Daniel Baluta
2011-10-28 22:31 ` David Miller
2011-10-28 22:40 ` Rick Jones
2011-10-29 2:24 ` David Miller
2011-10-29 12:32 ` Daniel Baluta
2011-10-30 4:13 ` David Miller
2011-10-31 18:10 ` Rick Jones [this message]
2011-10-31 20:02 ` Daniel Baluta
2011-10-31 21:29 ` Rick Jones
2011-10-28 21:53 ` Andy Lutomirski
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=4EAEE487.5080905@hp.com \
--to=rick.jones2@hp.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dbaluta@ixiacom.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org \
/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).