Re: Some questions about the new TCP congestion control code

2013-01-25 Thread John Baldwin
On Thursday, January 24, 2013 6:27:51 pm Lawrence Stewart wrote: > On 01/25/13 01:12, Andre Oppermann wrote: > > On 24.01.2013 14:28, Lawrence Stewart wrote: > >> On 01/16/13 06:27, John Baldwin wrote: > >>> One other thing I noticed which is may or may not be odd during this, > >>> is that > >>> i

Re: Some questions about the new TCP congestion control code

2013-01-24 Thread Lawrence Stewart
On 01/25/13 01:12, Andre Oppermann wrote: > On 24.01.2013 14:28, Lawrence Stewart wrote: >> On 01/16/13 06:27, John Baldwin wrote: >>> One other thing I noticed which is may or may not be odd during this, >>> is that >>> if you have a connection with TCP_NODELAY enabled and you fill your >>> cwnd a

Re: Some questions about the new TCP congestion control code

2013-01-24 Thread Andre Oppermann
On 24.01.2013 14:28, Lawrence Stewart wrote: On 01/16/13 06:27, John Baldwin wrote: One other thing I noticed which is may or may not be odd during this, is that if you have a connection with TCP_NODELAY enabled and you fill your cwnd and then you get an ACK back for an earlier small segment (le

Re: Some questions about the new TCP congestion control code

2013-01-24 Thread Lawrence Stewart
On 01/16/13 06:27, John Baldwin wrote: > On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 3:29:51 am Lawrence Stewart wrote: >> Hi John, >> >> On 01/15/13 08:04, John Baldwin wrote: >>> I was looking at TCP congestion control at work recently and noticed a few >> >> Poor you ;) >> >>> "odd" things in the current code

Re: Some questions about the new TCP congestion control code

2013-01-15 Thread John Baldwin
On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 3:29:51 am Lawrence Stewart wrote: > Hi John, > > On 01/15/13 08:04, John Baldwin wrote: > > I was looking at TCP congestion control at work recently and noticed a few > > Poor you ;) > > > "odd" things in the current code. First, there is this chunk of code in >

Re: Some questions about the new TCP congestion control code

2013-01-15 Thread Lawrence Stewart
Hi John, On 01/15/13 08:04, John Baldwin wrote: > I was looking at TCP congestion control at work recently and noticed a few Poor you ;) > "odd" things in the current code. First, there is this chunk of code in > cc_ack_received() in tcp_input.c: > > static void inline > cc_ack_received(stru

Some questions about the new TCP congestion control code

2013-01-14 Thread John Baldwin
I was looking at TCP congestion control at work recently and noticed a few "odd" things in the current code. First, there is this chunk of code in cc_ack_received() in tcp_input.c: static void inline cc_ack_received(struct tcpcb *tp, struct tcphdr *th, uint16_t type) { INP_WLOCK_ASSERT(