Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752104AbWCJAKT (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Mar 2006 19:10:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752106AbWCJAKS (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Mar 2006 19:10:18 -0500 Received: from [194.90.237.34] ([194.90.237.34]:17721 "EHLO mtlexch01.mtl.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752104AbWCJAKR (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Mar 2006 19:10:17 -0500 Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 02:10:31 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: "David S. Miller" Cc: rdreier@cisco.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, openib-general@openib.org, shemminger@osdl.org Subject: Re: TSO and IPoIB performance degradation Message-ID: <20060310001031.GA19040@mellanox.co.il> Reply-To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" References: <20060307.172336.107863253.davem@davemloft.net> <20060308125311.GE17618@mellanox.co.il> <20060309.154819.104282952.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060309.154819.104282952.davem@davemloft.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Mar 2006 00:12:39.0578 (UTC) FILETIME=[57BEA7A0:01C643D7] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1397 Lines: 30 Quoting David S. Miller : > Description > To improve efficiency (both computer and network) a data receiver > may refrain from sending an ACK for each incoming segment, > according to [RFC1122]. However, an ACK should not be delayed an > inordinate amount of time. Specifically, ACKs SHOULD be sent for > every second full-sized segment that arrives. If a second full- > sized segment does not arrive within a given timeout (of no more > than 0.5 seconds), an ACK should be transmitted, according to > [RFC1122]. A TCP receiver which does not generate an ACK for > every second full-sized segment exhibits a "Stretch ACK > Violation". Thanks very much for the info! So the longest we can delay, according to this spec, is until we have two full sized segments. But with the change we are discussing, could an ack now be sent even sooner than we have at least two full sized segments? Or does __tcp_ack_snd_check delay until we have at least two full sized segments? David, could you explain please? -- Michael S. Tsirkin Staff Engineer, Mellanox Technologies - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/