Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 11 Jul 2019 10:35:18 -0700
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Randall Stewart <rrs@netflix.com>
Cc:        Randall Ray Stewart <rrs@FreeBSD.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r349893 - in head/sys: modules/tcp/rack netinet netinet/tcp_stacks sys
Message-ID:  <e5ed5f95-769d-fd0c-3189-daaa6382529f@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <7695E2FC-406D-46CE-88F2-0690B9AAA36D@netflix.com>
References:  <201907102040.x6AKeern006731@repo.freebsd.org> <4cdc824e-7e71-731d-50d4-c3f6231f9858@FreeBSD.org> <7695E2FC-406D-46CE-88F2-0690B9AAA36D@netflix.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 7/10/19 9:48 PM, Randall Stewart wrote:
> John:
> 
> Thanks for the suggestions.. I have committed changes to the two
> nits. As to M_PROTO1, I see that in the NF world we have removed
> M_PROTO12 and moved the M_PROTO’s up 1 i.e. M_PROTO1 == 0x2000
> 
> So for now it is safe, since the M_TSTMP_LRO is not yet used.. but in
> my up and coming commits I will have to address this i.e. either do
> the same thing or just make it use M_PROTO12.
> 
> There are a couple of places M_PROTO1 is used on the receive path
> so that would not work there :o
> 
> After I get the DSACK fixes in my next change to get BBR in will
> be the LRO work…
> 
> So maybe I should just settle on using M_PROTO12 for that 
> what do you think?

If M_PROTO12 isn't used in the tree, then the approach we've used in
the past is to bump up the M_PROTO<n> values by one as in the NF
tree.

-- 
John Baldwin



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?e5ed5f95-769d-fd0c-3189-daaa6382529f>