[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1428863848.25985.359.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2015 11:37:28 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Kenneth Klette Jonassen <kennetkl@....uio.no>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, ycheng@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] tcp: improve SACK RTT for CC
On Sun, 2015-04-12 at 19:51 +0200, Kenneth Klette Jonassen wrote:
> tcp_sacktag_one() always picks the earliest sequence SACKed for RTT.
> This might not make sense for congestion control in cases where:
>
> 1. ACKs are lost, i.e. a SACK subsequent to a lost SACK covers both
> a new and an old segment at the receiver.
> 2. The receiver disregards the RFC 5681 recommendation to immediately
> ACK out-of-order segments.
>
> Give congestion control a RTT for the latest segment SACKed, which is the
> most accurate RTT estimate, but preserve the conservative RTT for RTO.
>
> Also remove the dependency on skb_mstamp_get() in tcp_sacktag_one() which
> potentially contributes to variance between RTT signals.
>
> This is a request for comments. For full effect, a later patch would move
> the call to pkts_acked() outside the scope of if (flag & FLAG_ACKED). As is,
> this hook only gets called when sequentially acknowledging new data.
> ---
> net/ipv4/tcp_input.c | 90 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
> 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> index a7ef679..8f0bd3c 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> @@ -1130,7 +1130,16 @@ static bool tcp_check_dsack(struct sock *sk, const struct sk_buff *ack_skb,
> struct tcp_sacktag_state {
> int reord;
> int fack_count;
> - long rtt_us; /* RTT measured by SACKing never-retransmitted data */
> + /* Timestamp for earliest never-retransmitted segment that was
> + * SACKed and its usec delta to the corresponding latest segment.
> + * RTO needs the earliest RTT to be conservative against receivers
> + * that might delay SACKing (RFC 5681 does not require ACKing
> + * out-of-order segments immediately), but congestion control should
> + * still get an accurate delay signal. Even without delayed SACKing,
> + * this helps mitigate the effect of ACK loss on delay-based CC.
> + */
> + struct skb_mstamp first_ackt;
> + u32 last_ack_us_delta;
> int flag;
> };
>
> @@ -1233,14 +1242,13 @@ static u8 tcp_sacktag_one(struct sock *sk,
> state->reord);
> if (!after(end_seq, tp->high_seq))
> state->flag |= FLAG_ORIG_SACK_ACKED;
> - /* Pick the earliest sequence sacked for RTT */
> - if (state->rtt_us < 0) {
> - struct skb_mstamp now;
>
> - skb_mstamp_get(&now);
> - state->rtt_us = skb_mstamp_us_delta(&now,
> - xmit_time);
> - }
> + if (state->first_ackt.v64 == 0)
> + state->first_ackt.v64 = xmit_time->v64;
> + else
> + state->last_ack_us_delta =
> + skb_mstamp_us_delta(xmit_time,
> + &state->first_ackt);
I do not think you need to perform this skb_mstamp_us_delta() at this
point.
Instead of storing a state->last_ack_us_delta, I would store
state->last_ackt
And later doing a single skb_mstamp_us_delta()
--
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