Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:19:13 -0500 | | From | William Allen Simpson <> | | Subject | Re: [net-next PATCH v3 2/3] net: TCP thin linear timeouts |
| |
Last year, I'm pretty sure I was on record as thinking this is only a marginally good idea, that would be better at the application layer.
Also that naming was a bit dicey. Now the names are more descriptive, but the "force" is a bit overkill.
How about? NET_TCP_FORCE_THIN_LINEAR_TIMEOUTS -> NET_TCP_THIN_LINEAR_TIMEOUTS TCP_THIN_LT -> TCP_THIN_LINEAR_TIMEOUTS TCP_THIN_LT_RETRIES -> TCP_THIN_LINEAR_RETRIES tcp_force_thin_linear_timeouts -> tcp_thin_linear_timeouts sysctl_tcp_force_thin_linear_timeouts -> sysctl_tcp_thin_linear_timeouts tp->thin_lt -> tp->thin_lto
The latter mostly traditional "to" for "timeout", as used most everywhere.
Andreas Petlund wrote: > diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c > index de7d1bf..a682479 100644 > --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c > +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c > @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ int sysctl_tcp_keepalive_intvl __read_mostly = TCP_KEEPALIVE_INTVL; > int sysctl_tcp_retries1 __read_mostly = TCP_RETR1; > int sysctl_tcp_retries2 __read_mostly = TCP_RETR2; > int sysctl_tcp_orphan_retries __read_mostly; > +int sysctl_tcp_force_thin_linear_timeouts __read_mostly; > Where is the sysctl initialized?
> + if ((tp->thin_lt || sysctl_tcp_force_thin_linear_timeouts) && > + tcp_stream_is_thin(sk) && sk->sk_state == TCP_ESTABLISHED && > + icsk->icsk_retransmits <= TCP_THIN_LT_RETRIES) {
Just for efficiency, I'd reorder this + if (sk->sk_state == TCP_ESTABLISHED && + (tp->thin_lt || sysctl_tcp_force_thin_linear_timeouts) && + tcp_stream_is_thin(sk) && + icsk->icsk_retransmits <= TCP_THIN_LT_RETRIES) {
|  |