[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100527080025.GB6800@basil.fritz.box>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 10:00:25 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: andi@...stfloor.org, therbert@...gle.com, shemminger@...tta.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, ycheng@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: Socket option to set congestion window
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 03:10:14PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
> Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 23:27:45 +0200
>
> > As I understand the idea was that the application knows
> > what flows belong to a single peer and wants to have
> > a single cwnd for all of those. Perhaps there would
> > be a way to generalize that to tell it to the kernel.
> >
> > e.g. have a "peer id" that is known by applications
> > and the kernel could manage cwnds shared between connections
> > associated with the same peer id?
> >
> > Just an idea, I admit I haven't thought very deeply
> > about this. Feel free to poke holes into it.
>
> Yes, a CWND "domain" that can include multiple sockets is
> something that might gain some traction.
>
> The "domain" could just simply be the tuple {process,peer-IP}
If process is in there this wouldn't work for a multi process
server?
Perhaps having it associated with a FD so that it could
be passed around with unix sockets if needed (just would
need to make sure the AF_UNIX gc can handle such cycles)
peer_id = open_peer_id();
/* peer id is like a fd */
socket = socket( ... );
set_peer_id(socket, peer_id);
...
close(peer_id);
-andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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