Re: Very poor TCP/SACK performance

Savochkin Andrey Vladimirovich (saw@msu.ru)
Tue, 8 Sep 1998 16:50:42 +0400


On Tue, Sep 08, 1998 at 02:41:08PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> Only out of order data should be pruned so this is fine. We have a situation

As far as I remember we drop all unacked packets when we are out of
buffer space. For the case it means that any incoming packet is dropped
until the application take some data off.

> where we are out of resources, we wish the other end to slow down and we need
> to flag the situation but cannot shrink the window. Dropping a frame is
> exactly that.
>
> In fact I found it worked extremely well because it also tended to cause
> silly window avoidance and get the other end back sending MTU sized blocks
> as the stall gave the sender time to build full blocks of data.
>
> The only really important thing for current code will be that rx_copybreak
> is > about 2/3rds of the MTU of the device using it.

:-)
That's right. But most current ethernet drivers use copybreak about 200 bytes.

Andrey

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/faq.html