netdev - Re: tbench wrt. loopback TSO

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 05 Nov 2008 13:06:45 -0800
From:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To:	Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
CC:	Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, efault@....de, mingo@...e.hu,
	a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Subject: Re: tbench wrt. loopback TSO

>>Ignoring the TSO case for a moment, if there is congestion and receiver 
>>window available and a user makes a > MSS send that isn't an integral 
>>multiple of the MSS, we don't delay the last subMSS segment do we?
> 
> 
> Without TSO, only Nagle could prevent sending that submss portion, so the 
> answer depends on what the window in-flight consists of.

I always thought that Nagle was supposed to be implemented as if it was 
on a user send() by user send() basis and not segment by segment, in 
which case no send() > MSS would be delayed by Nagle.

rick jones
--
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