Thanks for your reply, Eric.
Actually, this is a query about the code while I am reading code.
>From my instinct and the comment, I think we should choose the bigger
one but maybe I miss something(like your said, autotuning)
Anyway, I will read more codes and do more tests.
Thanks.
On Tue, Apr 1
On 04/17/2018 06:53 AM, Wang Jian wrote:
> I test the fix with 4.17.0-rc1+ and it seems work.
>
> 1. iperf -c IP -i 20 -t 60 -w 1K
> with-fix vs without-fix : 1.15Gbits/sec vs 1.05Gbits/sec
> I also try other windows and have similar results.
>
> 2. Use tcp probe trace snd_wind.
> with-fix vs
I test the fix with 4.17.0-rc1+ and it seems work.
1. iperf -c IP -i 20 -t 60 -w 1K
with-fix vs without-fix : 1.15Gbits/sec vs 1.05Gbits/sec
I also try other windows and have similar results.
2. Use tcp probe trace snd_wind.
with-fix vs without-fix: 1245568 vs 1042816
3. I don't see extra retra
Hi all,
While I read __tcp_select_window() code, I find that it maybe return a
smaller window.
Below is one scenario I thought, may be not right:
In function __tcp_select_window(), assume:
full_space is 6mss, free_space is 2mss, tp->rcv_wnd is 3MSS.
And assume disable window scaling, then
window =
