lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: PPP feature request (Tx queue len + close)
Hi folks,

> > It doesn't exist at the moment, but it would be easy enough to add
> > it. In the short term, you could even add an ifconfig to your
> > /etc/ppp/ip-up script to set the transmit queue length there.
>
> Will try that.
> Actually, this is why I ask you in advance, so that we have
>the time to think about it without rushing...
That's what exactly what I do to increase txqueue length.
ifconfig $1 txqueuelen 20

> > > > Could you produce some numbers showing better throughput, fewer
> > > > retransmissions, or whatever, with a smaller transmit queue length?
> > >
> > > Don't have number, but I don't need number to know that.
> >
> > Your case for wanting something done will be so much stronger if you
> > show that there is a measurable benefit as opposed to just a gut
> feeling. :)
>
> Well, it's pretty obvious when watching tcpdump. You see all
>the Tx clustered together and then nothing get Tx until the TCP window
>opens again. In other word, you have a full TCP window queued in PPP
>and IrDA.
> This is pretty bad for latency. Actually, you can verify that
>by doing ping while a TCP connection is active, you will see huge
>roundtrips.
Setting txqueuelen to 1 will pretty much kill TCP performance as soon as
window will grow
to more than 1 segment. Because net layer just drops packet if txqueue is
full and TCP will
have to re-transmit. Don't trust your gut feeling ;-).
I did some experiments with PPP over HDR links here in Qualcomm. And I had
to increase
queue just because stuff was dropped even before it reaches serial driver.
I can even claim
that for todays fast links like PPPoE, PPPoATM, HDR, etc txqueuelen == 3 is
way to small.

btw You might want to use tcptrace. Watching tcpdump on the fly is no fun.
tcptrace will
give you nice graphs of what happens and when.

> > My gut feeling is that the transmit queue length is already about as
> > short as we want it, and that if we make it any shorter then we will
> > start dropping a lot of packets at the transmit queue, and lose
> > performance because of that. But I could be wrong - any networking
> > gurus care to comment ?
>
> I believe that you won't drop packet, but just flow control
>TCP (which in turn will flow control the application). At least, this
>is the way it's happening within the IrDA stack.
You _will_ drop it, if txqueue is full. TCP will back off and re-transmit
but this will not allow TCP window to grow and you TCP performance will
be pretty bad.

I totally agree with Paul. Just decrease buffering below PPP.

Max

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.084 / U:2.572 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site