From: Jeffrey Altman <jaltman@auristor.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@auristor.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/5] rxrpc: Miscellaneous fixes
Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 01:57:43 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <955B77FD-C0C2-479E-9D85-D2F62E3DA48C@auristor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240507194447.20bcfb60@kernel.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2071 bytes --]
> On May 7, 2024, at 8:44 PM, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 3 May 2024 16:07:38 +0100 David Howells wrote:
>> Here some miscellaneous fixes for AF_RXRPC:
>>
>> (1) Fix the congestion control algorithm to start cwnd at 4 and to not cut
>> ssthresh when the peer cuts its rwind size.
>>
>> (2) Only transmit a single ACK for all the DATA packets glued together
>> into a jumbo packet to reduce the number of ACKs being generated.
>>
>> (3) Clean up the generation of flags in the protocol header when creating
>> a packet for transmission. This means we don't carry the old
>> REQUEST-ACK bit around from previous transmissions, will make it
>> easier to fix the MORE-PACKETS flag and make it easier to do jumbo
>> packet assembly in future.
>>
>> (4) Fix how the MORE-PACKETS flag is driven. We shouldn't be setting it
>> in sendmsg() as the packet is then queued and the bit is left in that
>> state, no matter how long it takes us to transmit the packet - and
>> will still be in that state if the packet is retransmitted.
>>
>> (5) Request an ACK on an impending transmission stall due to the app layer
>> not feeding us new data fast enough. If we don't request an ACK, we
>> may have to hold on to the packet buffers for a significant amount of
>> time until the receiver gets bored and sends us an ACK anyway.
>
> Looks like these got marked as Rejected in patchwork.
> I think either because lore is confused and attaches an exchange with
> DaveM from 2022 to them (?) or because I mentioned to DaveM that I'm
> not sure these are fixes. So let me ask - on a scale of 1 to 10, how
> convinced are you that these should go to Linus this week rather than
> being categorized as general improvements and go during the merge
> window (without the Fixes tags)?
Jakub,
In my opinion, the first two patches in the series I believe are important to back port to the stable branches.
Reviewed-by: Jeffrey Altman <jaltman@auristor.com <mailto:jaltman@auristor.com>>
Jeffrey
[-- Attachment #2: smime.p7s --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 3929 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-08 8:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-03 15:07 David Howells
2024-05-03 15:07 ` [PATCH net 1/5] rxrpc: Fix congestion control algorithm David Howells
2024-05-03 15:07 ` [PATCH net 2/5] rxrpc: Only transmit one ACK per jumbo packet received David Howells
2024-05-03 15:07 ` [PATCH net 3/5] rxrpc: Clean up Tx header flags generation handling David Howells
2024-05-03 15:07 ` [PATCH net 4/5] rxrpc: Change how the MORE-PACKETS rxrpc wire header flag is driven David Howells
2024-05-03 15:07 ` [PATCH net 5/5] rxrpc: Request an ACK on impending Tx stall David Howells
2024-05-08 2:44 ` [PATCH net 0/5] rxrpc: Miscellaneous fixes Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-08 7:57 ` Jeffrey Altman [this message]
2024-05-08 13:54 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-08 14:00 ` David Howells
2024-05-08 15:07 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-05-08 15:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-06-16 15:57 David Howells
2026-06-18 12:01 ` David Howells
2026-06-09 14:09 David Howells
2026-06-13 0:00 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2026-03-19 15:01 David Howells
2025-07-16 11:52 David Howells
2022-05-21 8:02 David Howells
2022-05-22 20:32 ` David Miller
2022-05-22 20:40 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=955B77FD-C0C2-479E-9D85-D2F62E3DA48C@auristor.com \
--to=jaltman@auristor.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-afs@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.dionne@auristor.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®