| To: | Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: bad TSO performance in 2.6.9-rc2-BK |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 30 Sep 2004 00:39:22 -0700 |
| Cc: | ak@xxxxxxx, niv@xxxxxxxxxx, jheffner@xxxxxxx, andy.grover@xxxxxxxxx, anton@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20040930054738.GA12667@gondor.apana.org.au> |
| References: | <Pine.NEB.4.33.0409291648560.3434-100000@dexter.psc.edu> <415B24C0.2020208@us.ibm.com> <20040929145050.71afa1ac.davem@davemloft.net> <20040929215613.GC26714@wotan.suse.de> <20040929162923.796d142e.davem@davemloft.net> <20040930000515.GA10496@gondor.apana.org.au> <20040929213310.40f5f33a.davem@davemloft.net> <20040930054738.GA12667@gondor.apana.org.au> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:47:38 +1000
Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 09:33:10PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> >
> > @@ -2413,7 +2410,7 @@
> > packets_acked);
> > if (sacked & TCPCB_URG) {
> > if (tp->urg_mode &&
> > - !before(scb->seq, tp->snd_up))
> > + !before(orig_seq, tp->snd_up))
> > tp->urg_mode = 0;
>
> That looks like a typo. We should check against the new starting
> sequence number, not the original. We should also change the !before
> to after since the original check applied to end_seq.
I agree about the first part, but the second I do not.
The new 'seq' is equivalent to what end_seq would be of the
TSO sub-packet. Therefore the correct test type would be
!before(seq, tp->snd_up), right?
|
| Previous by Date: | Re: bad TSO performance in 2.6.9-rc2-BK, Herbert Xu |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH] [NET] NEIGHBOUR: hold refcnt of net_device from proxy neighbor entries., YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: bad TSO performance in 2.6.9-rc2-BK, Herbert Xu |
| Next by Thread: | Re: bad TSO performance in 2.6.9-rc2-BK, Herbert Xu |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |