netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] tcp: Add rcv_wnd to TCP

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: <CAA93jw7q71mpenRMD0dWiVNap1WKD6O4+GCBagcPa5OhHTMErw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:14:33 +0100
From:   Dave Taht <dave.taht@...il.com>
To:     Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>
Cc:     Thomas Higdon <tph@...com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>,
        Dave Jones <dsj@...com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>,
        Soheil Hassas Yeganeh <soheil@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] tcp: Add rcv_wnd to TCP_INFO

On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 1:59 AM Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 6:32 PM Thomas Higdon <tph@...com> wrote:
> >
> > Neal Cardwell mentioned that rcv_wnd would be useful for helping
> > diagnose whether a flow is receive-window-limited at a given instant.
> >
> > This serves the purpose of adding an additional __u32 to avoid the
> > would-be hole caused by the addition of the tcpi_rcvi_ooopack field.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Higdon <tph@...com>
> > ---
>
> Thanks, Thomas.
>
> I know that when I mentioned this before I mentioned the idea of both
> tp->snd_wnd (send-side receive window) and tp->rcv_wnd (receive-side
> receive window) in tcp_info, and did not express a preference between
> the two. Now that we are faced with a decision between the two,
> personally I think it would be a little more useful to start with
> tp->snd_wnd. :-)
>
> Two main reasons:
>
> (1) Usually when we're diagnosing TCP performance problems, we do so
> from the sender, since the sender makes most of the
> performance-critical decisions (cwnd, pacing, TSO size, TSQ, etc).
> From the sender-side the thing that would be most useful is to see
> tp->snd_wnd, the receive window that the receiver has advertised to
> the sender.

I am under the impression, that particularly in the mobile space, that
network behavior
is often governed by rcv_wnd. At least, there's been so many papers on
this that I'd
tended to assume so.

Given a desire to do both vars, is there a *third* u32 we could add to
fill in the next hole? :)
ecn marks?

>
> (2) From the receiver side, "ss" can already show a fair amount of
> info about receive-side buffer/window limits, like:
> info->tcpi_rcv_ssthresh, info->tcpi_rcv_space,
> skmeminfo[SK_MEMINFO_RMEM_ALLOC], skmeminfo[SK_MEMINFO_RCVBUF]. Often
> the rwin can be approximated by combining those.
>
> Hopefully Eric, Yuchung, and Soheil can weigh in on the question of
> snd_wnd vs rcv_wnd. Or we can perhaps think of another field, and add
> the tcpi_rcvi_ooopack, snd_wnd, rcv_wnd, and that final field, all
> together.
>
> thanks,
> neal



-- 

Dave Täht
CTO, TekLibre, LLC
http://www.teklibre.com
Tel: 1-831-205-9740