[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89iJF2mw-2qFJ1r2xLo0FuH9JCNVPgTOAfnxL7nOX4qg2tg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 09:39:20 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>
Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>,
Chris Rapier <rapier@....edu>,
Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <mleitner@...hat.com>,
Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>,
Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4] tcp: Add RFC4898 tcpEStatsPerfDataSegsOut/In
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com> wrote:
> Per RFC4898, they count segments sent/received
> containing a positive length data segment (that includes
> retransmission segments carrying data). Unlike
> tcpi_segs_out/in, tcpi_data_segs_out/in excludes segments
> carrying no data (e.g. pure ack).
>
> The patch also updates the segs_in in tcp_fastopen_add_skb()
> so that segs_in >= data_segs_in property is kept. If
> tcp_segs_in() helper is used in this fastopen case, tp->segs_in
> has to be 0 reset first to avoid double counting. Also, it has
> to be done before __skb_pull(skb, tcp_hdrlen(skb)) while
> there is no need to check skb->len since skb has already
> been confirmed carrying data. I found it more confusing
> and chose to directly set segs_in and data_segs_in in
> this special case.
Note that on my TODO list after commit e11ecddf5128011c936cc5360780190cbc901fdc
I had the project of pulling TCP headers much earlier in input path
so that we do not have all these special cases.
Acked-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists