[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <154e3adaf0825906fa3240f3b15247eb@codeaurora.org>
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2018 15:43:28 -0700
From: Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan <subashab@...eaurora.org>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, lkp@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 05/10] net: qualcomm: rmnet: Set pacing rate
>> The real device over which the rmnet devices are installed also
>> aggregate multiple IP packets and sends them as a single large
>> aggregate
>> frame to the hardware.
>
> It would be nice to give some details about this in the changelog.
>
> Also what results you get with different values for the shift (10, 9,
> 8)
>
> My fear is that people might be tempted to blindly use the
> sk_pacing_shift_update() just because a single TCP flow gets 'better'
> results.
>
> bufferbloat is a serious issue, we do not want to allow a single TCP
> flow to fill a fifo.
>
> Otherwise, we could remove TCP Small queues overhead from the kernel
> and be happy.
>
> Thanks.
The test was run with iperf single stream TCP TX for a duration of 30s.
Pacing shift | Observed data rate (Mbps)
10 | 9
9 | 140
8 | 146
I will update all of this in the commit text in v3.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Powered by blists - more mailing lists