[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1340949008.29822.73.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 07:50:08 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, dave.taht@...il.com,
codel@...ts.bufferbloat.net, therbert@...gle.com,
mattmathis@...gle.com, ycheng@...gle.com, nanditad@...gle.com,
ncardwell@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] fq_codel: report congestion notification at
enqueue time
On Thu, 2012-06-28 at 22:29 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> I am pretty sure the behavior in RED is intentional.
>
> It's a soft push back on TCP.
>
tcp_enter_cwr() is called the same for DROP and CN
> We're taking this path when we are unable to sucessfully ECN mark a
> packet. But our intention was to do so.
>
Hmm, problem is the sender thinks the packet was queued for
transmission.
ret = macvlan_queue_xmit(skb, dev);
if (likely(ret == NET_XMIT_SUCCESS || ret == NET_XMIT_CN)) {
struct macvlan_pcpu_stats *pcpu_stats;
pcpu_stats = this_cpu_ptr(vlan->pcpu_stats);
u64_stats_update_begin(&pcpu_stats->syncp);
pcpu_stats->tx_packets++;
pcpu_stats->tx_bytes += len;
u64_stats_update_end(&pcpu_stats->syncp);
} else {
this_cpu_inc(vlan->pcpu_stats->tx_dropped);
}
NET_XMIT_CN has a lazy semantic it seems.
I will just dont rely on it.
--
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