On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 09:57:42PM -0700, Yuchung Cheng wrote:
...
> diff --git a/include/linux/tcp.h b/include/linux/tcp.h
> index 86a7eda..90edef5 100644
> --- a/include/linux/tcp.h
> +++ b/include/linux/tcp.h
> @@ -217,6 +217,9 @@ struct tcp_sock {
> u32 mdev_max_us; /* maximal mdev for the last rtt period */
> u32 rttvar_us; /* smoothed mdev_max */
> u32 rtt_seq; /* sequence number to update rttvar */
> + struct rtt_meas {
> + u32 rtt, ts; /* RTT in usec and sampling time in jiffies. */
> + } rtt_min[3];
First, thanks for all the work in this patch series. In particular,
applying Kern's check to ca_seq_rtt_us should fix some bad behavior
I've observed recently.
I only have a couple comments, so I abbreviated most of your patch.
Should rtt_meas.rtt be rtt_meas.rtt_us in order to be more consistent
with the naming of related variables?
...
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> index 38743e5..e177386 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
...
> @@ -2961,7 +3028,7 @@ void tcp_synack_rtt_meas(struct sock *sk, struct
> request_sock *req)
> rtt_us = skb_mstamp_us_delta(&now, &tcp_rsk(req)->snt_synack);
> }
>
> - tcp_ack_update_rtt(sk, FLAG_SYN_ACKED, rtt_us, -1L);
> + tcp_ack_update_rtt(sk, FLAG_SYN_ACKED, rtt_us, -1L, rtt_us);
> }
This didn't apply to net-next for me. I see seq_rtt_us instead of
rtt_us and a check on the existence of tp->srtt_us. Maybe I've
misapplied the patch? I'll try again and test the patch series
against the bad behavior I mentioned above as soon as I can.
Hopefully today.
-Andrew Shewmaker
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
