Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 17:50:38 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 17:50:18 -0500 Received: from tmr-02.dsl.thebiz.net ([216.238.38.204]:24326 "EHLO gatekeeper.tmr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 17:50:01 -0500 Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 17:48:26 -0500 (EST) From: Bill Davidsen To: jt@hpl.hp.com cc: paulus@samba.org, linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org, Linux kernel mailing list Subject: Re: PPP feature request (Tx queue len + close) In-Reply-To: <20020304144200.A32397@bougret.hpl.hp.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 4 Mar 2002, Jean Tourrilhes wrote: > Tx queue length > --------------- > Problem : IrDA does its buffering (IrTTP is a sliding window > protocol). PPP does its buffering (1 packet in ppp_generic + > dev->tx_queue_len = 3). End result : a large number of packets queued > for transmissions, which result in some network performance issues. > > Solution : could we allow the PPP channel to overwrite > dev->tx_queue_len ? > This is similar to the channel beeing able to set the MTUs and > other parameters... Random thoughts on this: - ifconfig sets txlength, and could channels get into contention? - if you reduce buffers too far performance sucks. - did you look at just reducing the packet size (MTU)? You should really use the above methods to diddle parameters and benchmark. If nothing else you can point to numbers as a reason to make any change. -- bill davidsen CTO, TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979. - 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/