[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0905021312070.8517@wrl-59.cs.helsinki.fi>
Date: Sat, 2 May 2009 13:20:02 +0300 (EEST)
From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
To: Satoru SATOH <satoru.satoh@...il.com>
cc: Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tcp: Fix tcp_prequeue() to get correct rto_min value
On Sat, 2 May 2009, Satoru SATOH wrote:
> This patch depends on the previous patch, makes tcp_prequeue() uses the
> correct tcp rto_min value returns from tcp_rto_min().
>
> Signed-off-by: Satoru SATOH <satoru.satoh@...il.com>
>
> ---
> include/net/tcp.h | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/net/tcp.h b/include/net/tcp.h
> index 284cc68..a54d139 100644
> --- a/include/net/tcp.h
> +++ b/include/net/tcp.h
> @@ -920,7 +920,7 @@ static inline int tcp_prequeue(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)
> wake_up_interruptible(sk->sk_sleep);
> if (!inet_csk_ack_scheduled(sk))
> inet_csk_reset_xmit_timer(sk, ICSK_TIME_DACK,
> - (3 * TCP_RTO_MIN) / 4,
> + (3 * tcp_rto_min(sk)) / 4,
> TCP_RTO_MAX);
> }
> return 1;
>
I'm not fully sure we really want this... I wonder did you run into some
real problem with the TCP_RTO_MIN based version as it's not setting RTO
timer but delayed ACK timer...? The change could have nasty effects to
interactivity of a flow if somebody is hit by nagle delay and the peer
has tuned their minimum RTO. Not that I in anyway believe it should be
that useful to set that minimum RTO because of frto that is nowadays
enabled.
In any case, I see very little point in putting them into a separate
patches due to non-complex nature of the actual change (with complex
changes it might help though).
--
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