[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710111300280.23026@kivilampi-30.cs.helsinki.fi>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 13:12:49 +0300 (EEST)
From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
To: TAKANO Ryousei <takano@...-inc.co.jp>
cc: Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] [TCP]: Fix lost_retrans loop vs fastpath problems
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, TAKANO Ryousei wrote:
> From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
> Subject: [RFC PATCH] [TCP]: Fix lost_retrans loop vs fastpath problems
> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 15:20:01 +0300
>
> Thanks Ilpo! I am trying to evaluate this patch.
There's a minor problem in this 2nd patch, it's just preventing the
cnt == tp->retrans_out short-circuit from working, not a correctness
problem though it could affect the performance. I'll post larger patch
series among which is a fixed version (hopefully today).
> But, I got
> a kernel panic at net_rx_action() in our experimental setting.
> I am using the net-2.6.24 kernel _without_ this patch.
> (I will post a bug report separately).
...Please do. :-)
> Anyway, I will report the result as soon as possible.
Thanks. ...It's very interesting to see because it's not that clear
cut how the extra processing that is necessary affects high-speed
performance, it could add yet another source of RTOs due
processing latency.
--
i.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists