lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [net-next PATCH v3 3/3] net: TCP thin dupack
Last year, I'm pretty sure I was on record as thinking this is *not* a
good idea. But at least it now requires a sysctl to turn on, and
should default to off.

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_DUPACK -> NET_TCP_THIN_LINEAR_DUPACK
tcp_force_thin_dupack -> tcp_thin_linear_dupack
sysctl_tcp_force_thin_dupack -> sysctl_tcp_thin_linear_dupack


Andreas Petlund wrote:
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> index 28e0296..c5a73ab 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> @@ -89,6 +89,8 @@ int sysctl_tcp_frto __read_mostly = 2;
> int sysctl_tcp_frto_response __read_mostly;
> int sysctl_tcp_nometrics_save __read_mostly;
>
> +int sysctl_tcp_force_thin_dupack __read_mostly;
> +
> int sysctl_tcp_moderate_rcvbuf __read_mostly = 1;

Where is the sysctl initialized?



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-02-12 12:21    [W:0.086 / U:0.160 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site