[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <000001c90944$8edb4290$a05ee183@D2GT6T71>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 14:30:40 -0500
From: Wenji Wu <wenji@...l.gov>
To: 'Ilpo Järvinen' <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
Cc: 'John Heffner' <johnwheffner@...il.com>,
'David Miller' <davem@...emloft.net>,
'Netdev' <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: about Linux adaptivly adjusting dupthresh
Thanks,
-----Original Message-----
From: Ilpo Järvinen [mailto:ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 1:53 PM
To: Wenji Wu
Cc: 'John Heffner'; 'David Miller'; 'Netdev'
Subject: Re: about Linux adaptivly adjusting dupthresh
On Thu, 28 Aug 2008, Wenji Wu wrote:
> Sorry, I made a mistake in the last post, what I mean is "algorithms
> adaptively adjust TCP reordering threshold dupthresh".
Ah, that makes much more sense. :-)
> I understand that "Eifel algorithm" or "DSACK TCP" will adaptively adjust
> dupthresh to deal with packet reordering. Are there any other
> reordering-tolerant algorithms implemented in Linux?
First about adaptive dupthresh:
In addition to DSACK, we use never-retransmitted block's cumulative ACKs
to increase the dupthresh (see tcp_clean_rtx_queue). Then there's some
newreno thing when dupacks > packets_out but I've never really figured it
fully out if that's doing the correct thing when doing + tp->packets_out
besides the most simple case (see tcp_check_reno_reordering).
I don't think that eifel adjusts dupthresh though it can remove ambiguity
problem and thus we can use the never-retransmitted block acked detection
more often.
Also, there's some added logic for small-windowed case to reduce dupthresh
temporarily (at the smallest to 3 or whatever the default is) if window is
not large enough to generate the incremented (see tcp_time_to_recover).
Again, I'm not too sure what you mean by "reordering tolerant", but here
are some things that may be related:
FACK -> RFC3517 auto-fallback if reordering is detected (basically holes
are only counted with FACK in the more-than-dupthresh check).
I guess Eifel like timestamp checking belongs to this category (in
tcp_try_undo_partial).
If latency spike + reordering occurs, SACK FRTO might help but I think
it depends on scenario.
--
i.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists