[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1429116128.7346.110.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 09:42:08 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>
Cc: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@...citrix.com>,
Malcolm Crossley <malcolm.crossley@...rix.com>,
Jonathan Davies <jonathan.davies@...rix.com>,
Wei Liu <Wei.Liu2@...rix.com>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC] tcp: Allow sk_wmem_alloc to exceed
sysctl_tcp_limit_output_bytes
On Wed, 2015-04-15 at 15:36 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-04-15 at 15:19 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Malcolm Crossley
> [...]
> > > From a networking point of view, the backend is a switch. Is it OK to
> > > consider the packet to have been transmitted from the guest point of
> > > view once the backend is aware of the packet?
> > >
> > > This would help justify the skb_orphan() in the frontend.
> >
> > This sounds sensible to me, particularly if virtio_net is already doing it.
>
> I also find Malcolm's argument above pretty compelling.
Yes, and then you'll have to help the virtio ongoing effort trying to
get rid of this skb_orphan()
Basically you're adding head of line blocking, as a single flow is able
to fill your queue.
--
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