[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251014100457.3f6de3e0@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2025 10:04:57 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, "David S . Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Neal Cardwell
<ncardwell@...gle.com>, Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, Kuniyuki
Iwashima <kuniyu@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: better handle TCP_TX_DELAY on established
flows
On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 09:16:23 -0700 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 9:06 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 02:40:39 -0700 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > Or add a best effort, so that TCP can have some clue, vast majority of
> > > cases is that the batch is 1 skb :)
> >
> > FWIW I don't see an official submission and CI is quite behind
> > so I'll set the test to ignored for now.
>
> You mean this TCP_TX_DELAY patch ? Or the series ?
>
> I will send V2 of the series soon. (I added the test unflake in it)
Great, I wasn't clear whether you'll send a separate fix or v2.
So I disabled the test itself.
Not the patches, patches are still queued.
Sorry for the confusion, our CI is what it is - just carry on as normal
and I'll try to keep up.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists