Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 15:22:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 15:22:43 -0500 Received: from cs182072.pp.htv.fi ([213.243.182.72]:12672 "EHLO cs182072.pp.htv.fi") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 15:22:28 -0500 Message-ID: <3C1FA558.E889A00D@welho.com> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 22:21:44 +0200 From: Mika Liljeberg X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.16 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru CC: Mika.Liljeberg@nokia.com, davem@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sarolaht@cs.helsinki.fi Subject: Re: TCP LAST-ACK state broken in 2.4.17-pre2 [NEW DATA] In-Reply-To: <200112181837.VAA10394@ms2.inr.ac.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru wrote: > > Hello! > > > from the SYN exchange (about 200 ms). So, something is wrong? > > Well, the guess was right and this is pleasant. Yes. We also saw a case, where the RTO was quite high but not quite 120, so we got exactly one retransmission. > The only minor :-) question remained is to guess how rto could happen > to be at this value. I will think. Well, if you have some guesses, > please, tell me. Sorry, I'm not really trying to debug Linux so I haven't given it much thought. We're exercising retransmission algorithms with a packet loss ratio of 5% if that's any help. > Is this intel btw? It's ARM in little endian mode. > I just see that other side > sends bogus misaligned tcp options... not a problem, but it can > be reason of funnyies with some probability. Heh, they're not bogus, just differently aligned. :) This is an implementation where packet processing latency is not highest item on the list of optimization targets. Now that you mention it, tcp_parse_options() in input.c seems to expect that the timestamps are word aligned, which is not the case here, and a false assumption in any case. I would have expected a bus error for that, unless the pointer cast generates code that magically word aligns the resulting pointer... Cheers, MikaL - 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/