Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:27:42 -0600
From:      Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com>
To:        Mark Peek <mark@whistle.com>
Cc:        Paul Herman <pherman@frenchfries.net>, Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>, Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com>, net@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: I have delayed ACK problems
Message-ID:  <20010224142742.T5714@prism.flugsvamp.com>
In-Reply-To: <p05100104b6bdb7b22391@[10.1.10.113]>
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.32.0101252250480.10921-100000@husten.security.at12.de> <p05100104b6bdb7b22391@[10.1.10.113]>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 11:19:02AM -0800, Mark Peek wrote:
> At 11:19 PM +0100 1/25/01, Paul Herman wrote:
> >On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> >
> >>  <<On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 11:14:03 -0600 (CST), Jonathan Lemon 
> >><jlemon@flugsvamp.com> said:
> >>
> >>  The important part was the
> >>	if (callout_pending(tp->tt_delack)) {
> >>		...
> >>		tp->t_flags |= TF_ACKNOW;
> >>	}
> >>
> >>  bit.  This causes us to ack immediately where previously we would just
> >>  delay an already-schedule delayed ack.
> >
> >Yep, that does it.  Simple.  Elegant.  I see now why my (bloated
> >unintelligible) patch worked, it also didn't reset the timer when a
> >delayed ack might have already been pending.
> >
> >OK, there are other parts of the code that do the same thing
> >(TCP_REASS, SYN was ACKed, et. al.) but if no one objects, I'll
> >send-pr the patch to be commited.
> 
> Was there ever a final resolution to this problem? I checked CVS and 
> there didn't appear to be any code changes made as a result of this 
> discussion. If this was a real problem, I'm wondering whether it 
> should be checked into -current and considered for MFC into 4.3.

The patches are still sitting in my tree, as I've been unable
to come up with a test case that actually makes a difference.  

The "tar cf host:..." example is bogus, as the problem here is apparently
the protocol doesn't stream data, but waits for an entire block to be
ack'd before continuing; using a larger blocking factor results in better
transfer times.
--
Jonathan

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010224142742.T5714>