[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200908312015.18470.opurdila@ixiacom.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 20:15:18 +0300
From: Octavian Purdila <opurdila@...acom.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: themann@...ibm.com, raisch@...ibm.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][net-next] LRO: improve aggregation in case of zero TSecr packets
On Monday 31 August 2009 08:11:05 David Miller wrote:
> From: Octavian Purdila <opurdila@...acom.com>
> Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:08:31 +0300
>
> > This fixes a temporary performance issue we noticed in back to back
> > TSO - LRO tests when such tests are run within five minutes after
> > boot.
> >
> > The TSval field of TCP packets is filled in based on the current
> > jiffie, which is initialized at -300*HZ. That means that in 5 minutes
> > after reboot it will wrap to zero.
>
> RFC1323 says we absolutely must ignore zero TSecr values.
>
> It is a bug that the stack emits a zero value when it means to give a
> real TSecr value that will be used.
>
> Probably we can do something like emit '1' when we would emit '0'
> based upon jiffies.
>
> And this would be an improvement from now in that having a off-by-one
> TSecr in this situation is better than emitting one which we can
> guarentee will be ignored.
Right, why did I thought that the LRO TSecr issue can happen even when
emitting a right TSval ? :-/
I'll follow with a patch which takes this approach.
Thanks,
tavi
--
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