netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] Increase snd/rcv buffers in pppoe

To: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Increase snd/rcv buffers in pppoe
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>
Date: 26 Feb 2004 21:52:20 +0100
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:52:20 +0100
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>, ak@xxxxxxx, yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20040226124245.5b3c77bf.davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20040223105359.GA91938@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040223.200101.39143636.yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040223111659.GB10681@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040223.203843.04073965.yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040223102613.33838132.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <20040225211526.74478066.ak@xxxxxxx> <20040223133233.71eecc99.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <20040226194900.GA8230@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040226124245.5b3c77bf.davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 12:42:45PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
> On 26 Feb 2004 20:49:00 +0100
> Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > I don't think it should be only sized for big datagrams and other obscure 
> > cases.
> > Better is a reasonable default to fit at least 64K of data with a standard 
> > MTU like ~1.4K. 
> > Or may resize it on MTU change, but I'm not sure that's worth the effort. 
> > 
> > Are you working on this or should I prepare a new patch? 
> 
> Let's just leave things how we've changed them, and when people complain
> about jumbo MTU ipv6 icmp messages we'll address it.

Ah, I missed that you already checked it in.  Sorry for the noise.

I will test now if your change really fixes the DSL performance problem.

-Andi

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>