netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/6] tcp: remove non GSO code

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9897026.Es27HaT4ta@natalenko.name>
Date:   Tue, 20 Feb 2018 20:51:20 +0100
From:   Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>
To:     Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>,
        Soheil Hassas Yeganeh <soheil@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/6] tcp: remove non GSO code

On úterý 20. února 2018 20:39:49 CET Eric Dumazet wrote:
> I am not trying to compare BBR and Reno on a lossless link.
> 
> Reno is running as fast as possible and will win when bufferbloat is
> not an issue.
> 
> If bufferbloat is not an issue, simply use Reno and be happy ;)
> 
> My patch helps BBR only, I thought it was obvious ;)

Umm, yes, and my point was rather something like "the speed on a lossless link 
while using BBR with and without this patch is the same". Sorry for a 
confusion. I guess, the key word here is "lossless".

Oleksandr