linux-kernel - RE: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-id: <HNEBLGGMEGLPMPPDOPMGAEANCGAA.wenji@fnal.gov>
Date:	Thu, 30 Nov 2006 11:04:00 -0600
From:	Wenji Wu <wenji@...l.gov>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
Cc:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, akpm@...l.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: RE: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP


>The solution is really simple and needs no kernel change at all: if you
>want the TCP receiver to get a larger share of timeslices then either
>renice it to -20 or renice the other tasks to +19.

Simply give a larger share of timeslices to the TCP receiver won't solve the
problem.  No matter what the timeslice is, if the TCP receiving process has
packets within backlog, and the process is expired and moved to the expired
array, RTO might happen in the TCP sender.

The solution does not look like that simple.

wenji




-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/