[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2829276.7yTBvbjqgd@natalenko.name>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 00:06:23 +0100
From: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>,
Soheil Hassas Yeganeh <soheil@...gle.com>,
Jerry Chu <hkchu@...gle.com>, Dave Taht <dave.taht@...il.com>
Subject: Re: TCP and BBR: reproducibly low cwnd and bandwidth
On pátek 16. února 2018 23:50:35 CET Eric Dumazet wrote:
> /* snip */
> If you use
>
> tcptrace -R test_s2c.pcap
> xplot.org d2c_rtt.xpl
>
> Then you'll see plenty of suspect 40ms rtt samples.
That's odd. Even the way how they look uniformly.
> It looks like receiver misses wakeups for some reason,
> and only the TCP delayed ACK timer is helping.
>
> So it does not look like a sender side issue to me.
To make things even more complicated, I've disabled sg on the server, leaving
it enabled on the client:
client to server flow: 935 Mbits/sec
server to client flow: 72.5 Mbits/sec
So still, to me it looks like a sender issue. No?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists