All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
Cc: nanditad@google.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	mattmathis@google.com, codel@lists.bufferbloat.net,
	ncardwell@google.com, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] tcp: TCP Small Queues
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 01:38:35 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1342049915.3265.8184.camel@edumazet-glaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FFDC48D.2030606@hp.com>

On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 11:23 -0700, Rick Jones wrote:
> On 07/11/2012 08:11 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >
> >
> > Tests using a single TCP flow.
> >
> > Tests on 10Gbit links :
> >
> >
> > echo 16384 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_limit_output_bytes
> > OMNI Send TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to 192.168.99.2 (192.168.99.2) port 0 AF_INET
> > tcpi_rto 201000 tcpi_ato 0 tcpi_pmtu 1500 tcpi_rcv_ssthresh 14600
> > tcpi_rtt 1875 tcpi_rttvar 750 tcpi_snd_ssthresh 16 tpci_snd_cwnd 79
> > tcpi_reordering 53 tcpi_total_retrans 0
> 
> I take it you hacked your local copy of netperf to emit those?  Or did I 
> leave some cruft behind in something I committed to the repository?
> 
Yep, its a netperf-2.5.0 with a one line change to output these TCP_INFO
bits

> What was the ultimate limiter on throughput?  I notice it didn't achieve 
> link-rate on either 10 GbE nor 1 GbE.
> 

My lab has one fast machine (source in this 10Gb test), and one slow
machine (Intel Q6600 quad core), both with ixgbe cards.

On Gigabit test, the receiver is a laptop.


>  > Thats the plan : limiting numer of bytes in Qdisc, not number of bytes
>  > in socket write queue.
> 
> So the SO_SNDBUF can still grow rather larger than necessary?  It is 
> just that TCP will be nice to the other flows by not dumping all of it 
> into the qdisc at once.  Latency seen by the application itself is then 
> unchanged since there will still be (potentially) as much stuff queued 
> in the SO_SNDBUF as before right?

Of course SO_SNDBUF can grow if autotuning is enabled.

I think there is a bit of misunderstanding about this patch and what it
does.

It only makes sure the amount of packets (from socket write queue) are
cloned in qdisc/device queue in a limited way, not "as much as allowed"

  reply	other threads:[~2012-07-11 23:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-06-28 17:07 [PATCH net-next] fq_codel: report congestion notification at enqueue time Eric Dumazet
2012-06-28 17:51 ` Dave Taht
2012-06-28 18:12   ` Eric Dumazet
2012-06-28 22:56     ` Yuchung Cheng
2012-06-28 23:47       ` Dave Taht
2012-06-29  4:50         ` Eric Dumazet
2012-06-29  5:24           ` Dave Taht
2012-07-04 10:11           ` [RFC PATCH] tcp: limit data skbs in qdisc layer Eric Dumazet
2012-07-09  7:08             ` David Miller
2012-07-09  8:03               ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-09  8:48                 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-09 14:55               ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-10 13:28                 ` Lin Ming
2012-07-10 15:13                 ` [RFC PATCH v2] tcp: TCP Small Queues Eric Dumazet
2012-07-10 17:06                   ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-10 17:37                   ` Yuchung Cheng
2012-07-10 18:32                     ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-11 15:11                   ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-11 15:16                     ` Ben Greear
2012-07-11 15:25                       ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-11 15:43                         ` Ben Greear
2012-07-11 15:54                           ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-11 16:03                             ` Ben Greear
2012-07-11 18:23                     ` Rick Jones
2012-07-11 23:38                       ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2012-07-11 18:44                     ` Rick Jones
2012-07-11 23:49                       ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-12  7:34                         ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-12  7:37                           ` David Miller
2012-07-12  7:51                             ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-12 14:55                               ` Tom Herbert
2012-07-12 13:33                   ` John Heffner
2012-07-12 13:46                     ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-12 16:44                       ` John Heffner
2012-07-12 16:54                         ` Jim Gettys
2012-06-28 23:52 ` [PATCH net-next] fq_codel: report congestion notification at enqueue time Nandita Dukkipati
2012-06-29  4:18   ` Eric Dumazet
2012-06-29  4:53 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-06-29  5:12   ` David Miller
2012-06-29  5:24     ` Eric Dumazet
2012-06-29  5:29       ` David Miller
2012-06-29  5:50         ` Eric Dumazet
2012-06-29  7:53           ` David Miller
2012-06-29  8:04           ` David Miller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1342049915.3265.8184.camel@edumazet-glaptop \
    --to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=codel@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=mattmathis@google.com \
    --cc=nanditad@google.com \
    --cc=ncardwell@google.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rick.jones2@hp.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.