Can someone please answer what the criterias for backports into attitude_adjustment are? Jow just closes it as a ticket (https://dev.openwrt.org/ticket/12355). And no response here. Thats not so great for collaboration. In this case I ask because of r33686 and r33687 (r33887), see below.
Thanks Alex On Mi, 7.11.2012, 22:38, Alexander Stadler wrote: > This and the following patch went into trunk r33686 and r33687 (r33887). > What are the criterias for backports into attitude_adjustment? > I'm asking because some make it into there directly and if this went > upstream i thought its going to be a canditate soon. > > Thanks! > > Alex > > On Mo, 1.10.2012, 17:49, Dave Täht wrote: >> From: Dave Taht <dave.t...@bufferbloat.net> >> >> Bugfix from linux head - don't delay acks from ECN congestion >> experienced in some situations. >> --- >> ...net-next-tcp-ecn-dont-delay-ACKS-after-CE.patch | 63 >> ++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 63 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 >> target/linux/generic/patches-3.3/050-net-next-tcp-ecn-dont-delay-ACKS-after-CE.patch >> >> diff --git >> a/target/linux/generic/patches-3.3/050-net-next-tcp-ecn-dont-delay-ACKS-after-CE.patch >> b/target/linux/generic/patches-3.3/050-net-next-tcp-ecn-dont-delay-ACKS-after-CE.patch >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..547e4fa >> --- /dev/null >> +++ >> b/target/linux/generic/patches-3.3/050-net-next-tcp-ecn-dont-delay-ACKS-after-CE.patch >> @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@ >> +From patchwork Mon Aug 6 21:04:43 2012 >> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> +MIME-Version: 1.0 >> +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> +Subject: [net-next] tcp: ecn: dont delay ACKS after CE >> +Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 11:04:43 -0000 >> +From: Eric Dumazet <eric.duma...@gmail.com> >> +X-Patchwork-Id: 175453 >> +Message-Id: <1344287083.26674.83.camel@edumazet-glaptop> >> +To: David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> >> +Cc: netdev <net...@vger.kernel.org>, >> + Neal Cardwell <ncardw...@google.com> >> + >> +From: Eric Dumazet <eduma...@google.com> >> + >> +While playing with CoDel and ECN marking, I discovered a >> +non optimal behavior of receiver of CE (Congestion Encountered) >> +segments. >> + >> +In pathological cases, sender has reduced its cwnd to low values, >> +and receiver delays its ACK (by 40 ms). >> + >> +While RFC 3168 6.1.3 (The TCP Receiver) doesn't explicitly recommend >> +to send immediate ACKS, we believe its better to not delay ACKS, >> because >> +a CE segment should give same signal than a dropped segment, and its >> +quite important to reduce RTT to give ECE/CWR signals as fast as >> +possible. >> + >> +Note we already call tcp_enter_quickack_mode() from TCP_ECN_check_ce() >> +if we receive a retransmit, for the same reason. >> + >> +Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eduma...@google.com> >> +Cc: Neal Cardwell <ncardw...@google.com> >> +Acked-by: Neal Cardwell <ncardw...@google.com> >> + >> +--- >> +net/ipv4/tcp_input.c | 6 +++++- >> + 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> + >> + >> + >> +-- >> +To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in >> +the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org >> +More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> + >> +diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c >> +index 2fd2bc9..fa2c2c2 100644 >> +--- a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c >> ++++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c >> +@@ -237,7 +237,11 @@ static inline void TCP_ECN_check_ce(struct >> tcp_sock >> *tp, const struct sk_buff *s >> + tcp_enter_quickack_mode((struct sock *)tp); >> + break; >> + case INET_ECN_CE: >> +- tp->ecn_flags |= TCP_ECN_DEMAND_CWR; >> ++ if (!(tp->ecn_flags & TCP_ECN_DEMAND_CWR)) { >> ++ /* Better not delay acks, sender can have a very low >> cwnd */ >> ++ tcp_enter_quickack_mode((struct sock *)tp); >> ++ tp->ecn_flags |= TCP_ECN_DEMAND_CWR; >> ++ } >> + /* fallinto */ >> + default: >> + tp->ecn_flags |= TCP_ECN_SEEN; >> -- >> 1.7.9.5 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openwrt-devel mailing list >> openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org >> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel >> > > > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel > _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
