netdev - Re: [RFC net-next] tcp: allow larger TSO to be built under overload

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20220309085407.3ffd2851@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Wed, 9 Mar 2022 08:54:07 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>
Cc:     Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next] tcp: allow larger TSO to be built under overload

On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 11:42:24 -0500 Neal Cardwell wrote:
> > SGTM! The change may cause increased burstiness, or is that unlikely?
> > I'm asking to gauge risk / figure out appropriate roll out plan.  
> 
> In theory it could cause increased burstiness in some scenarios, but
> in practice we have used this min_rtt-based TSO autosizing component
> in production for about two years, where we see improvements in load
> tests and no problems seen in production.

Perfect, sounds safe to put it in the next point release here, then.
Thank you!