netdev - Re: tcp bw in 2.6

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]

Date:	Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:40:25 +0200
From:	Daniel Schaffrath <danielschaffrath@....com>
To:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Larry McVoy <lm@...mover.com>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, davem@...emloft.net,
	wscott@...mover.com, Linux NetDev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: tcp bw in 2.6

On 2007/10/02  , at 18:47, Stephen Hemminger wrote:

> On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 09:25:34 -0700
> lm@...mover.com (Larry McVoy) wrote:
>
>>> If the server side is the source of the data, i.e, it's transfer  
>>> is a
>>> write loop, then I get the bad behaviour.
>>> ...
>>> So is this a bug or intentional?
>>
>> For whatever it is worth, I believed that we used to get better  
>> performance
>> from the same hardware.  My guess is that it changed somewhere  
>> between
>> 2.6.15-1-k7 and 2.6.18-5-k7.
>
> For the period from 2.6.15 to 2.6.18, the kernel by default enabled  
> TCP
> Appropriate Byte Counting. This caused bad performance on  
> applications that
> did small writes.
Stephen, maybe you can provide me with some specifics here?

Thanks a lot!!
Daniel

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html