[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B7D05ED.4060900@simula.no>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 10:18:37 +0100
From: Andreas Petlund <apetlund@...ula.no>
To: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
CC: Franco Fichtner <franco@...tsummer.de>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
hannemann@...s.rwth-aachen.de, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
shemminger@...tta.com, william.allen.simpson@...il.com,
damian@....rwth-aachen.de, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v4 2/3] net: TCP thin linear timeouts
On 02/18/2010 10:09 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Feb 2010, Franco Fichtner wrote:
>
>> Andreas Petlund wrote:
>>> On 02/18/2010 09:41 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, David Miller wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> From: Andreas Petlund <apetlund@...ula.no>
>>>>> Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:40:41 +0100
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> @@ -341,6 +342,8 @@ struct tcp_sock {
>>>>>> u16 advmss; /* Advertised MSS
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> u8 frto_counter; /* Number of new acks after RTO */
>>>>>> u8 nonagle; /* Disable Nagle algorithm?
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> + u8 thin_lto : 1,/* Use linear timeouts for thin
>>>>>> streams */
>>>>>> + thin_undef : 7;
>>>>>>
>>>>> There is now a gap of 3 unused bytes here in this critical
>>>>> core TCP socket data structure.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please either find a way to avoid this hole, or document
>>>>> it with a comment.
>>>>>
>>>> There would be multiple bits free for use in both frto_counter and nonagle
>>>> byte.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I was playing aroud with this setup:
>>>
>>> =========
>>> u8 nonagle : 4,/* Disable Nagle algorithm? */
>>> thin_lto : 1,/* Use linear timeouts for thin streams */
>>> thin_dupack : 1,/* Fast retransmit on first dupack */
>>> thin_undef : 2;
>>> =========
>>>
>>> Do you think that would do the trick?
>>>
>>
>> According to Ilpo, it would be ok to reduce both ftro_counter and
>> nonagle, so why not join all these into u16 and leave the remaining
>> free bits documented for other people. Like this:
>>
>> u16 frto_counter:x; /* Number of new acks after RTO */
>> u16 nonagle:y; /* Disable Nagle algorithm? */
>> u16 thin_lto:1; /* Use linear timeouts for thin streams */
>> u16 unused:15-x-y;
>>
>> Not sure about the y and x. Ilpo, can you comment on those values?
>
> I don't remember top of the hat how much of nonagle used, but for
> frto_counter max value was 3 iirc.
I think nonagle uses 4 bits:
======
#define TCP_NAGLE_OFF 1 /* Nagle's algo is disabled */
#define TCP_NAGLE_CORK 2 /* Socket is corked */
#define TCP_NAGLE_PUSH 4 /* Cork is overridden for already queued data */
======
> However, I'm unsure if compiler is
> nowadays wise enough to handle bitfields in some not all so stupid way.
Would you then recommend to use a byte for each value, thus avoiding the bitfields?
Cheers,
Andreas
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists